Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Geetarani Panda v. Asstt. CIT 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5809 (Ctk-Trib)
REFERRED Nidan v. Asstt. CIT 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2693 (Ctk-Trib)
REFERRED Indra Bansal & Ors. v. Asstt. CIT 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2085 (Jod-Trib)
REFERRED CIT & Anr. v. B.J.N. Hotels Ltd. 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1635 (Karn-HC)
REFERRED Shreelekha Damani v. Dy. CIT 2015 TaxPub(DT) 3650 (Mum-Trib)
REFERRED CIT v. Binani Industries Ltd. 2015 TaxPub(DT) 1588 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Akil Gulamali Somji v. ITO 2012 TaxPub(DT) 3167 (Pune-Trib)
REFERRED Asstt. CIT v. Orissa Stevedores Ltd. 2012 TaxPub(DT) 2144 (Ctk-Trib)
REFERRED CIT v. T.O. Abraham & Co. 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0792 (Ker-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Hi Tech Arai Ltd. 2010 TaxPub(DT) 0762 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Shanti Lal Godawat & Ors. v. Asstt. CIT 2009 TaxPub(DT) 1930 (Jod-Trib)
REFERRED Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT & Anr. 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1603 (SC)
REFERRED Rishabchand Bhansali v. Deputy CIT 2004 TaxPub(DT) 1407 (Karn-HC)
REFERRED United Electrical Company (P) Ltd. v. CIT & Ors. 2002 TaxPub(DT) 1670 (Del-HC)
REFERRED Sakthivel Bankers & Ors. v. Assistant CIT 2002 TaxPub(DT) 0592 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Verma Roadways v. Assistant CIT 2000 TaxPub(DT) 0840 (Ahd-Trib)
REFERRED Rafique Abdul Hamid Kokani Alias Mohd. Rafique Abdul Hamid v. Deputy CIT 2000 TaxPub(DT) 0543 (Mum-Trib)
REFERRED Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Deputy CIT & Ors. 1999 TaxPub(DT) 1106 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Kirtilal Kalidas & Co. v. Deputy CIT 1998 TaxPub(DT) 0926 (Mad-Trib)
REFERRED Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax v. Kappumalai Estate 1998 TaxPub(DT) 0459 (Ker-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Purshottamdas T. Patel 1994 TaxPub(DT) 0544 (Guj-HC)
REFERRED Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1994 TaxPub(DT) 0425 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Sewduttroy Rambullav & Son v. CIT 1993 TaxPub(DT) 0520 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Arrah Sasaram Light Railway Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1993 TaxPub(DT) 0411 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED India Ferro Alloy Industry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 1993 TaxPub(DT) 0164 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT 1991 TaxPub(DT) 1526 (SC)
REFERRED K. Joseph Jacob v. Agricultural Income Tax Officer and Another 1991 TaxPub(DT) 0801 (Ker-HC)
REFERRED Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1988 TaxPub(DT) 0230 (All-HC)
REFERRED Ramanand Agarwalla v. CIT 1985 TaxPub(DT) 0211 (Gau-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Kailasho Devi Burman & Ors. 1978 TaxPub(DT) 0582 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. 1973 TaxPub(DT) 0421 (SC)
REFERRED CIT v. Balkrishna Malhotra 1971 TaxPub(DT) 0347 (SC)
REFERRED Badri Prosad Bajoria v. CIT 1967 TaxPub(DT) 0031 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED V.S. Sivalingam Chettiar v. CIT 1966 TaxPub(DT) 0182 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Esthuri Aswathiah v. CIT 1963 TaxPub(DT) 0467 (Mys-HC)
REFERRED N. Subba Rao v. Income Tax Officer 1963 TaxPub(DT) 0123 (Mys-HC)
REFERRED Sushil Chandra Ghose v. Income Tax Officer & Ors. 1959 TaxPub(DT) 0004 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED Rm. P.R. Viswanathan Chettiar v. CIT 1954 TaxPub(DT) 0036 (Mad-HC)
 
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3181 (Gau-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 153A Section 153D

Compliance of section 153D is mandatory in nature and, therefore, assessment order framed under section 153A in absence of obtaining prior approval of JCIT, for the assessment year under consideration was invalid and 'null' in the eye of law.

Search and seizure - Assessment under section 153A - Validity - No approval obtained under section 153D--AO pleading requirement under section 153D as mere procedural in nature

Assessee challenged validity of assessment framed under section 153A on the ground that AO framed assessment without obtaining prior approval of Jt.CIT as required under section 153D. AO's case was that requirement under section 153D was merely a procedural one and assessment framed by AO could not be considered as void just because there was a small breach in observing provisions of section 153D. Held: It was noted that wordings and language used in section 153D and the heading 'Prior approval necessary for assessment in cases of search or requisition' which has been provided under section 153D, do not leave an iota of doubt about the very intention of legislature to make compliance of section 153D, a mandatory. In other words, compliance of section 153D is mandatory in nature. Therefore, assessment order passed by AO, in the assessee's case, without taking prior approval from Jt.CIT, was 'null' in the eye of law.

Applied:Swapan Kumar Paul ITA No. 136 to 142/Gau/2018, for assessment year 2008-09 to 2014-15, Order, dated 31-7-2019.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour

A.Y. : 2014-15



IN THE ITAT, GAUHATI BENCH

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT