Section 158BG of the Income Tax Act

Approval under Section 153D for search assessments is not a mere formality; it requires the approving authority to apply its mind judiciously to the subject matter and ensure satisfaction of legal and procedural requirements for each assessment year.

The previous approval required for assessment orders under provisions like Section 158BG or Section 153D is an administrative power and an internal matter, not deciding the assessee's rights. A mere irregularity in granting such administrative approval does not vitiate the assessment order.

Audi alteram partem, or the right to be heard, is a fundamental principle of natural justice that applies to all quasi-judicial proceedings, including those before tax authorities.

An irregularity in granting approval under Section 158BG of the Act is not fatal to an assessment order.

Procedural irregularities, especially where initiation was valid but completion was flawed, are often curable and may not automatically invalidate an entire order. This principle, tied to natural justice, means minor defects in procedure can be remedied without voiding the proceedings.

The application of mind by the approving authority is essential for the validity of approval granted under section 153D of the Income Tax Act. Failure to apply mind renders the approval invalid.

A mere irregularity in granting approval under Section 158BG of the Income-tax Act does not render the resulting assessment order invalid or fatal.

The Supreme Court's decision in Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT is cited to support arguments in subsequent tax cases.

A mere irregularity in granting approval under Section 158BG of the Income-tax Act does not render the assessment order fatal or invalid.