Tag Archive: Satisfaction Note

Series: Notice u/s 148 recd. What to do Check list: point first : Pls see the date and time of digitally signing of the Ld. AO and digitally granting of approval by the Prescribed Authority. HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD decided on SEPTEMBER 8, 2022

Series: Notice u/s 148 recd. What to do Check list: point first : Pls see the date and time of digitally signing of the Ld. AO and digitally granting of approval by the Prescribed Authority. HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD decided…
Read more

147, 148, 148 Series, 151, Allahbad high court, In Favour of Assessee

September 26, 2022

Question: Q.The search in the premises of the assessees is on the basis of warrant issued in the name of B. The AO without applying his mind consciously and mandatorily had not stated in the satisfaction note that the seized documents belong to “other person” i.e; the assessee. The question is that without recording such a satisfaction can AO initiate proceedings against the “other persons i.e; the assessee” u/s 153C of the Act. ITAT Banglore Bench passed the order on Jul 30, 2021 in the case of ARSHAD ISPAT & ANR. vs. DCIT. Section 139, 147, 148, 149, 151, 153C

ARSHAD ISPAT & ANR. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH ‘C’ N. V. VASUDEVAN, VP & B. R. BASKARAN, AM. ITA No. 926/Bang/2015, 928 & 929/Bang/2015, 930 & 931/Bang/2015 Jul 30, 2021 Section…
Read more

132, 153C, AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10, AY 2010-11, Bangalore Tribunal, borrowed satisfaction, In Favour of Assessee, incriminating material, Other person, Satisfaction, Satisfaction Note, Search and seizure

August 10, 2021

The question in the present case is as to whether the information received from the investigation wing/search team would constitute ‘reason to believe’ empowering the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment u/s 147/148. Answer is given by ITAT Ahmedabad on 12/11/2020 in the case of Hitesh Ashok Vaswani Vs DCIT. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-240-2021/

Reopening u/s 147/148 at the instance of information received from DDI wing Hitesh Ashok Vaswani Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Appeal Number : IT(SS)A No. 118 to 123/Ahd/2019 Date of Order : 12/11/2020 AY: 2009-10 to 2014-15 The question in…
Read more

147, 148, 151, 153, Ahmedabad Tribunal, AY 2009-10, AY 2010-11, AY 2011-12, AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15, borrowed satisfaction, Concealment of income, In Favour of Assessee, In favour of Assessee (Partly)

Search and Seizure- No seizure of jewellery when it is stock of the assessee as the protection is provided in proviso appearing after sub clause – (iii) to sub Section (1) of Section 132 for stock. Further Satisfaction note clearly disclosed that formulation of “reason to believe” was post search and seizure. Action of search and seizure is bad in law. Saddle the Deptt. with costs at Rs.50,000/-. KHEM CHAND MUKIM Vs.Principal Director of Income Tax. Jan 9, 2020 IT-CASES-214-2020

KHEM CHAND MUKIM vs. PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX & ORS. HIGH COURT OF DELHI VIPIN SANGHI & SANJEEV NARULA, JJ. W.P.(C) 5343/2019 Jan 9, 2020 (2020) 186 DTR 0145 (Del), (2020) 313 CTR 0014 (Del), (2020) 423 ITR 0129…
Read more

131(1A), 132, 132(1)(c), 132(1)(iii), 132(1)(v), 132B, 2018-19, AY 2015-16, AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18

October 11, 2020

Section 153C- Supreme Court of India on on 5 March, 2020 Before issuing notice ‎under Section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be ‎‎“satisfied” that, inter alia, any document seized or requisitioned “belongs to” a person ‎other than the searched person. If the satisfaction note recorded under Section 153C of ‎the Act in respect of the assessee, i.e., a third party, hold invalid entire proceedings taken ‎there under is null and void. However, in the case where the Assessing Officer of the ‎searched person and the other person is the same, it is sufficient by the Assessing Officer ‎to note in the satisfaction note that the documents seized from the searched person ‎belonged to the other person i.e; the assessee. In the case of M/S. Super Malls Private ‎Limited. vs PCIT.‎ AY 2008-09

Kindly see para 6 “6. This Court had an occasion to consider the scheme of Section 153C of the Act and the conditions precedent to be fulfilled/complied with before issuing notice under Section 153C of the Act in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra)…
Read more

153C, AY 2008-09, In favour of Revenue, Satisfaction, Satisfaction Note, Supreme Court