आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपरु म(cid:581)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR (cid:302)ी पाथ (cid:91) सारथी चौधर(cid:547), Ûया(cid:467)यक सदèय के सम¢

BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील स.ं /ITA No.474/RPR/2025 (cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Manoj Kumar Sahu

151, Village: Rajpur, Tehsil: Dhamdha, Dist. Durg-491 331 (C.G.)

PAN: EOMPS2921J .......अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant बनाम / V/s.

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent Assessee by : Shri S.R. Rao, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 22.09.2025 घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 02.09.2024 for the assessment year 2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2. In this case, the assessee has filed both legal grounds as well as grounds on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that he would assail the legal ground first and if the said legal ground is answered affirmative, then the grounds on merits shall become academic only.

3. The assesse had raised three legal grounds in total. The first legal ground raised by the assessee reads as follows:

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the initiation of re-assessment proceedings is illegal and without jurisdiction in so far as the notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued without obtaining the mandatory approval u/s. 151 of the Act.”

Regarding the first legal ground as per the order sheet entry, dated

15.09.2025, this Bench has observed and held as follows:

“The first legal contention raised by the assessee is that the issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act is invalid because of the fact that prior to issuance of the same, approval from the competent authority u/s. 151 of the Act was not obtained by the A.O. However, this contention of the assessee is absolutely incorrect and false and as per the record it is evident that an approval u/s. 151 for A.Y.2013-14 was obtained by the A.O from the competent authority dated 17.02.2020. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on

20.02.2020. Hence, it is crystal clear that such approval u/s. 151 of the Act was obtained by the A.O prior to the issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Accordingly, this legal contention raised by the assessee is dismissed. The additional ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is dismissed.”

Therefore, the first legal ground assailed by the assessee is dismissed as had already been observed in the previous hearing by the Bench.

4. The second legal ground as assailed by the assessee reads as follows:

“2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the approval granted by the Hon’ble Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Raipur is illegal and invalid being undated and the date of approval needs to be shown, the issue being limitation sensitive.”

That further on the aforesaid issue as per the order sheet entry, dated

15.09.2025, this Bench has observed and held as follows:

“Regarding the additional ground of appeal No.2, both the parties requested for some time. It is observed by the Bench that since already date is mentioned and signature is also there by the competent authority in the digital copy of approval u/s. 151 of the Act which was acquired by the department. The question is that as to how the assessee is prejudiced by non-mentioning of the date in the physical copy which was sent to the assessee. Parties are directed to file submission on the aforesaid aspect……….”

However, at the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw this legal ground of appeal since the assessee does not want to press the same. Having heard the submissions of the Ld.

Counsel, the second legal