Rupinder Deep Kaur Sohi v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 67 (1

$~64 & 65 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 11421/2025 & CM APPL. 46740/2025+W.P.(C) 11428/2025 & CM APPL. 46754/2025+W.P.(C) 11428/2025 & CM APPL. 46754/2025 RUPINDER DEEP KAUR SOHI.....PetitionerThrough:Mr.PrakashSinha,Mr.AyushKumar, Mr. Aman Bansal AND Ms.AnjaliBansal,Advocatesforpetitioner. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 67 (1) DELHI.....RespondentThrough:Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr.AnantMann,JSC&Ms.AditiSabharwal, Advocate CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMARO R D E R%04.08.2025 1.On the last date of hearing, Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, learned counsel for theRevenue sought time to take instructions. 2.As per his instructions, the respondent intend to issue a corrigendumto the annexure appended to approval under Section 151 of the Income TaxAct, 1961 [the Act] (pages 19-23) more specifically to paragraph 6 thereof,to correct the error which has crept in the said paragraph. 3.It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no approval of the PCIT as is required under sub clause (iv) ofExplanation (2) of the Section 148 of the Act. The submission is contestedby Mr. Ruchir Bhatia by placing before us the original record to contend that the approval of the Principal Commissioner, as is required under sub clause(iv) of Explanation(2) was obtained on 18.03.2025, which according to thecounsel for the petitioner has not been shared with the petitioner. 4.He states as of now he shall withdraw the petition to enable thepetitioner raise all objections both the facts and in law before the AssessingOfficer. 5.In view of the submission made by the counsel for petitioner, thepresent petitions as well as pending application(s), if any, are dismissed aswithdrawn. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J AUGUST 04, 2025 rk VINOD KUMAR, J