YASH TUTEJA,RAIPUR V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08 , NEW DELHI

ITA 896/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Yash Tuteja against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Delhi, which arose from the assessments made under section 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi. The primary contention was regarding the validity of the search assessments, specifically the approval process under section 153D, which the appellant argued was obtained in a mechanical manner without proper consideration of the relevant documents and proceedings. The Tribunal admitted the additional ground raised by the appellant and found merit in the argument that the approvals were granted without a thorough examination of the assessment records, leading to the quashing of the assessments for the specified years.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839312 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: NTPC Limited vs. 229 ITR 383, Varas International P Ltd vs. 284 ITR 80, Dheeraj Chaudhary vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 6158 to 6160/Del/2018 and ITA Nos. 6214 to 6216/Del/2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVIN RAWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P. ROY CHOUDHARI
• Keywords: Document seized; Documents seized; Assessment record; Competent authority
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

"INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 894, 895 and 896/Del/2025 (AYs: 2011-12, 2018-19 and 2020-21) Yash Tuteja, 35/1396, Behind Farishta Nushing House, Katora Talab, Raipur Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-08, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AIYPT4837A Assessee by : Shri P. Roy Choudhari, ADv Revenue by: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 18/02/2026 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, AM 1. These appeals in ITA Nos. 894 to 896/Del/2025 for AYs2011-12, 2018-19 and 2020-21, arises out of the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 31.01.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 30.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos. 984, 895 and 896/Del/2025 YashTuteja Page | 2 2. The Assessee has raised a preliminary ground challenging the validity of the search assessment framed in his hands section 153A r.ws. 143(3) of the Act in view of the fact that approval under section 153D of the Act has been obtained from the competent authority in a mechanical manner which is not in consonance with the scheme of the Act. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. This ground was not raised by the Assessee before the learned CITA. Hence the Assessee had raised the same by way of Additional Ground No.1 vide letter dated 27.10.2025. This being a legal ground and going to the root of the matter and facts relevant for its adjudication are already forming part of the records of the department. Hence, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC limited reported in 229 ITR 383 and Varas International P Ltd reported in 284 ITR 80, the said ground is hereby admitted and taken up for adjudication first. 4. The ld AR submitted that the ld AO while seeking approval u/s 153D of the Act from Addl. CIT merely forwarded the draft assessment order alone which is evident from the page 193 of the Paper Book containing letter dated 30.03.2022 in AY 2011-12. This goes to prove that the ld Addl. CIT did not have the benefit of the various queries raised by the ld AO during the course of assessment proceedings together with the copy of the seized documents and the replies filed by the assessee thereon while granting approval u/s 153D of the Act. But the ld Addl. CIT, Central Range-2, New Delhi vide letter dated 30.03.2022 granted approval u/s 153D of the Act and in the said letter he had specifically mentioned that assessment records is returned herewith to the ld AO. The ld AR pointed out that when assessment records were not even forwarded by the ld AO to the ld Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos. 984, 895 and 896/Del/2025 YashTuteja Page | 3 Addl. CIT, how the ld Addl CIT could have returned the assessment folder while granting approval on 30.03.2022. 5. Per contra, the ld DR vehemently argued that the ld AO had merely committed a typographical error by not mentioning the forwarding of assessment records also along with draft assessment order in the letter dated 30.03.2022 seeking approval u/s 153D of the Act. We find that the assessee had obtained information under RTI Act, 2005 from the ld AO raising specific query seeking for copy of communication sent by the ld AO to the Addl. CIT for approval u/s 153D of the Act for AY 2011-12. In response to the said query, the ld AO had furnished the copy of letter dated 30.03.2022 to the assessee under RTI. The relevant documents containing the information sought under RTI Act, 2005 by the assessee and documents furnished thereon by the ld AO under RTI Act are enclosed in pages 191 to 194 of the Paper Book for AY 2011-12. These documents clearly established that only the draft assessment order was sent by the ld AO to the ld Addl. CIT while seeking approval u/s 153D of the Act. Hence, we hold that the mentioning of returning of assessment records by the ld Addl CIT in the letter dated 31.03.2022 while granting approval u/s 153D of the Act is contrary to fact as he could not have returned the assessment records to the ld AO. Hence, it clearly goes to prove that approval of the draft assessment order u/s 153D has been accorded by the ld Addl. CIT in a mechanical manner without due application of mind and without looking into the seized documents and various replies filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. 6. For AY 2018-19, the ld AO had sought approval to the draft assessment order vide letter dated 29.03.2022 by merely enclosing the draft assessment order. This is enclosed at page 125 of the Paper Book filed for AY 2018-19. The ld Addl. CIT had accorded approval exactly in the same fashion on 30.03.2022 as Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos. 984, 895 and 896/Del/2025 YashTuteja Page | 4 was done for AY 2011-12. This approval is enclosed at pages 124 of the Paper Book filed for AY 2018-19. 7. Similarly, the ld AO had sought for approval to the draft assessment order for AY 2020-21 on 30.03.2022 enclosing only the draft assessment order. Approval of the same has been accorded by the ld Addl. CIT on the very same day i.e. 30.03.2022. The relevant documents are enclosed at pages 143 to 144 of the Paper Book filed for AY 2020-21 before us. 8. Hence, it could be safely concluded that the approval for all the three assessment years u/s 153D of the Act has been accorded by the ld Addl. CIT in a mechanical manner which is against the spirit of provisions of Section 153D of the Act. The issue of approval being granted in a mechanical manner u/s 153D of the Act was subject matter of adjudication by the Third Member of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Dheeraj Chaudhary Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 6158 to 6160/Del/2018 and ITA Nos. 6214 to 6216/Del/2018 for AYs 2009-10 to 2014-15 dated 12.09.2025 wherein the entire decisions of various Hon'ble High Courts and the principles enunciated therein in the context of approval proceedings u/s 153D of the Act had been duly considered. For the sake of brevity, the said elaborate order is not reproduced herein. 9. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the decision of the Third Member of the Delhi Tribunal, we hold that the search assessment framed based on such invalid approval deserves to be quashed. Accordingly, the assessments for AYs. 2011-12, 2018-19 and 2020-21 are hereby quashed on this limited count itself and additional Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is hereby allowed. Since, the entire search assessments are quashed, the various grounds raised by the assessee and the additional ground No. 2 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos. 984, 895 and 896/Del/2025 YashTuteja Page | 5 raised by the assessee both on law as well as on merits need not be gone into as adjudication of the same would only be academic in nature and hence, they are left open. 10. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/02/2026. -Sd/- -Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (M. BALAGANESH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 18/02/2026 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "