IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2909/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Avtar Singh Kochar Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25

751, B-VI Bhiwani Stand, Delhi Rohtak Haryana – 124001 (cid:1)थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AEOPK4447F Appellant .. Respondent ITA No.4438/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

ACIT, Central Circle-25 Vs. Avtar Singh Kochar Room No. 317, 3^rd Floor, M/s Singh Petro, Petrol ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Pump, Near ShirdiSai Extension Baba Mandir, VPO Delhi – 110055 Kharawar, near ChahalPahal Hotel Delhi Road, Rohtak, Haryana –

124001 (cid:1)थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AEOPK4447F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. MayankPatawari, Adv, Sh. AlashOjha, Adv.

Respondent by : Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 18.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.01.2026 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

These cross appeals preferred by the assessee and revenue against the order dated 28.03.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-31 Delhi, (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No : ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1075172746(1) arising out of the order dated 14.07.2021 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the DCIT, CC-25, for AY:

2019-20.

2. On hearing both sides we find that assessee in its appeal has raised and additional ground as follows:

“That the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act is bad in law and void ab initio, since the mandatory approval under section 153D of the Act was granted mechanically and without application of mind by the approving authority, rendering the approval invalid in the eyes of law.”

3. Considering that the additional ground and legal ground which can be decided on the basis of admitted facts the same is admitted for hearing.

4. The Ld. AR has drawn our attention to the approval dated 13.07.2021 which has been granted by the Addl. CIT, Central Range-7, New Delhi in response to a letter dated 12.07.2021 of the AO by which approval of the competent authority u/s 153D of the Act was called and it was contended that approval has been granted in a consolidated manner for 7 Assessment Years falling in 2013-14 to 2019-20 which is not as per law.

4. Ld. DR has countered the same and submitted that since common issue was involved the competent authority did not need much of time to go through the assessment records and granted the approval which was sought on 12.07.2021 and granted on 13.07.2021. The ld. DR specifically pointed out that in para 3 of the approval ld. competent authority granted approval as mentioned of electronic evidence being relied. It was also submitted that otherwise also it is merely administrative function and the approval order need not be an elaborate one.

5. We have taken into consideration the approval granted by the competent authority and considering it appropriate to reproduce the same herein below:

6. After taking into consideration the aforesaid and the assessment order we find that the appellant is an individual and was engaged in the business of running a petrol pump as the proprietor of M/s Singh Petro during the year under consideration. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted at the residential premises and a survey action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the appellant on 06/02/2019. The search operation conducted on 06/02/2019 continued for3 days till 08/02/2019. The statement of the appellant was recorded by the search team wherein a surrender of income from hawala operation was made by him. In the statements recorded u/s 132(4) and 131(I A) of the Act, and in the submissions made by him before the AO, the appellant had explained that the margin earned by him ranges from 15 to 20 paisa per dollar i.e. approximately 0.3%. However, the AO applied 3.4 % and assessed the income of the appe