VINOD GUPTA,DELHI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

ITA 1167/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves six appeals by Vinod Gupta against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-27, New Delhi for the assessment years 2014-15 to 2020-21. The primary legal issue was the validity of the assessments framed under section 143(3) read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act, following a search action on 23.12.2019. The assessee contended that the approvals for the assessments were not validly accorded under section 153D of the Act. The Tribunal admitted this legal ground and found that the common approval sought by the Assessing Officer for multiple years was improper, leading to the quashing of all assessments for the specified years.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 776690 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2025
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, Allcargo Global Logistics Ltd. vs. DCIT, PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar, PCIT Vs. MDLR Hotels (P) Ltd., ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYAINDER SINGH SIDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: SAURAV ROHTGI; RAJAT MITTAL
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member & Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Judicial Member ITA No. 1163/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 ITA No. 1164/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 ITA No. 1165/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 ITA No. 1166/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 ITA No. 1167/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 ITA No. 1168/Del/2025: Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Vinod Gupta, B-25/26, 2nd floor, Left Side, Freedom Fighter Enclave, Neb Sarai, New Delhi Vs ACIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABIPG0820D Assessee by : Sh. Saurav Rohtgi, CA & Sh. Rajat Mittal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing: 01.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 19.09.2025 ORDER Per Sudhir Kumar, Judicial Member: The instant batch of six appeals pertains to the single assessee herein namely, Vinod Gupta against the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-27, New Delhi pertaining to assessment years 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21. 2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused their respective submissions alongwith all the case files. 3. We next note that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of all the impugned assessments framed u/s Printed from counselvise.com 2 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act, in consequence to the search action herein dated 23.12.2019, on the ground that the learned prescribed authority had not accorded a valid approval thereto u/s 153D of the Act. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the instant legal ground sought to be raised at the assessee’s behest goes to the root of the matter and therefore, we quote National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC); as considered in Allcargo Global Logistics Ltd. vs. DCIT (2012) 137 ITD 287 (SB) (Mum), that such an additional ground could very well be allowed to be raised in section 254(1) proceedings, in order to determine the correct tax liability of an assessee provided all the relevant facts form part of the records. 4. It is in this factual backdrop that we admit the assessee’s instant legal ground and note with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned Assessing Officer had sought the prescribed authority’s approval on 29.03.2023 which stood granted on 30.03.2023. The clinching fact which from page 2 in the assessee’s paper book is that the learned Assessing Officer herein had infact sought a common approval for all these assessment years from 2014-15 to 2020-21 which stood granted, and therefore, we quote PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 163 taxmann.com 9 (Del.), PCIT Vs. MDLR Hotels (P) Ltd. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) and ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. (2024) 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC), to conclude that such a combined section 153D approval indeed vitiates the entire assessment itself. We draw strong support therefrom to quash all the impugned assessments framed herein in assessee’s case in assessment years 2014-15, 2016- 17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 in very terms. Printed from counselvise.com 3 5. As a result, the assessee’s quantum appeals ITA Nos. 1163 to 1168/Del/2025 involving the corresponding impugned assessment succeed. 5.1 All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic. 6. To sum up, these assessee’s six appeals ITA Nos. 1163 to 1168/Del/2025 are allowed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 19/09/2025. SD/- Sd/- (M. Balaganesh) (Sudhir Kumar) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 19/09/2025 *SR BHATNAGGAR* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "