APF ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer's satisfaction note for initiating proceedings under Section 153C was not proper. The note failed to clarify whether the seized incriminating material actually belonged to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) heard an appeal concerning the assessment year 2009-10. The primary issue was the validity of proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a search action.
What were the issues?
The key legal issue was whether the Assessing Officer recorded a proper satisfaction under Section 153C to initiate proceedings, specifically regarding the ownership of seized documents.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- 533 citing
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘ A’ BENCH, HYDERABAD.
M/s. APF Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad. PAN AAHCA 1896J …..Appellant. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Hyderabad. …..Respondent. Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao. Respondent By : Shri Danda Srinivas (D.R.) Date of Hearing : 20.07.2021. Date of Pronouncement : 24.08.2021. O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for Asst. Year 2009-10 arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Hyderabad’s order dt.02.12.2019 passed in case No.10104/2019-20/A2/CIT(A)-6 in proceedings under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
We notice at the outset that the assessee's first and foremost grievance in ground Nos.3 to 5 challenge correctness of initiation of section 153C proceedings in furtherance to the department’s search action dt.11.03.2010. The sole issue that arises for our apt adjudication at this stage therefore is as to whether the learned lower authorities’ have recorded a proper apropos satisfaction u/s. 153C of the Act or not. We notice from a perusal of the corresponding assessment order(s) sheet at page 41 in the paper book that the Assessing Officer had nowhere made it clear as to whether the corresponding incriminating material found or seized during the course of search “belong” to the assessee or not. We make it clear that the impugned satisfaction had been recorded well before the legislative amendment in section 153C providing Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 1.6.2015. We further deem it appropriate to reproduce the Assessing Officer’s satisfaction note as under :
Search & seizure operations were conducted in the MBS Jewelers Pvt. Ltd. group of cases on 11.03.2010. During the course of search, books of accounts, documents & other loose sheets were found and seized. As per the seized documents, pages 101 to 117 of Annexure AHBSPL/PJT/2 relates to M/s. APF Estates Pvt. Ltd. proceedings u/s.153C is initiated.”
Faced with this situation and on account of the fact that no rebuttal to the foregoing clinching satisfaction note has come from the Revenue side, we adopt stricter instruction as per hon'ble apex court larger bench decision in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar & Co. (2018) 9 SCC 1 (SC) and quash the impugned assessment framed u/s. 153C of the Act. All other pleadings on merits are rendered academic.
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026