CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears

362 ITR 673Supreme Court of India2014#122 most cited

What is CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears authority for?

The recording of a satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer is a jurisdictional prerequisite for assessments under Section 153C, and the six-year limitation period for such assessments is reckoned from the date this satisfaction is recorded.

528

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears · section 153C · satisfaction note · jurisdictional prerequisite · limitation period · seized material · assessment year · block period · search assessment · section 158BD

Also reported as

43 Taxmann.com 446223 Taxmann 115

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 143(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 144Section 115BBESection 292C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdincome tax settlement commissionsection 158bcsection 144asection 144basatisfaction notesection 158bblock periodsection 158section 153c(1)documents seizedsection 292c

Judgments citing CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Sri C T Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 284/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Sri C T Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 283/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Sri C T Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 282/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Smt.Pallavi Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 274/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Smt.Pallavi Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 273/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Smt.Pallavi Ravi, Chikkamangalur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 are dismissed as indicated above

ITA 272/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 292C

…leading to an inference of undisclosed income is a sine qua non for invocation of section 153C of the Act”. After considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Manish Maheshwari Vs. ACIT (289 ITR 341) and CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 and other judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts; including the case of SSP Aviations Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 214 (Delhi) which supports the Revenue and on consideration of the CBDT, Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2014, the Hon’ble Karnataka answered the question of law at paras 55 and 56 thereof as under:…

Karnataka Strips Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT Cen Cir-33, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2003-04 to

ITA 4188/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 271

…AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in not appreciating the facts in the light of provisions of section 153C of the Act, and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014) 362 ITR 673(SC) where the procedure for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR further submitted that as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for the purpose of section 158BD recording of satisfaction note is pre-requisite and also has laid down the stages at which such satisfaction m…

Karnataka Strips Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT Cen Cir-33, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2003-04 to

ITA 4187/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 271

…AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in not appreciating the facts in the light of provisions of section 153C of the Act, and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014) 362 ITR 673(SC) where the procedure for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR further submitted that as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for the purpose of section 158BD recording of satisfaction note is pre-requisite and also has laid down the stages at which such satisfaction m…

Karnataka Strips Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT Cen Cir-33, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2003-04 to

ITA 4186/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 271

…AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in not appreciating the facts in the light of provisions of section 153C of the Act, and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014) 362 ITR 673(SC) where the procedure for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR further submitted that as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for the purpose of section 158BD recording of satisfaction note is pre-requisite and also has laid down the stages at which such satisfaction m…

Karnataka Strips Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT Cen Cir-33, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2003-04 to

ITA 4185/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 271

…AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in not appreciating the facts in the light of provisions of section 153C of the Act, and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014) 362 ITR 673(SC) where the procedure for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR further submitted that as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for the purpose of section 158BD recording of satisfaction note is pre-requisite and also has laid down the stages at which such satisfaction m…

Karnataka Strips Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT Cen Cir-33, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2003-04 to

ITA 4184/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 271

…AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in not appreciating the facts in the light of provisions of section 153C of the Act, and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014) 362 ITR 673(SC) where the procedure for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR further submitted that as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for the purpose of section 158BD recording of satisfaction note is pre-requisite and also has laid down the stages at which such satisfaction m…

M/S Kptcl, Hubli vs. ITO(OSD)(TDS)Ltpu, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2301/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V Arvind, Advocate and Shri Dilip, Advocate (Standing counsels)
Section 10Section 17(1)(va)Section 192Section 200Section 201Section 201(1)

…use the expression “Bonafide” at all and to incorporate the concept of bonafide in proceedings u/s.201(1) of the Act is itself not permissible. In this regard he drew our attention to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwear 362 ITR 673 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is not permissible to read into a section words which are not present in the section. 15. We have considered the submissions of the learned DR and are of the view that Sec.192 of the Act uses the word “estimate” and therefore the statutory intention is that it should be an approximation. It…

Mamta Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 280/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 May 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri H.M. Singhvi &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153C

…akkar 337 ITR 258 (Guj) 3. ITAT Amritsar in the case of ACIT Central Circle-1, Jalandhar vs. Ripan Deep Takhar, delivered on 13/06//2016 He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana 362 ITR 673 and submitted that a satisfaction note is a sine-qua-non and must be prepared by the A.O. before transmitting the record to the other A.O. who has jurisdiction over such other person. 5. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has submitted that during the course of search and seizure action, two agreements to sell were found from the premises of Shri…

Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Jazzy B, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle - II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 341/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 337/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 338/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 339/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 340/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 341/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Jazzy B, 10, Seiyu Complex, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Model Town, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amzps7517F Assessee By : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Jalandhar All Dated 14.03.2017 For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal In The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09 Which Reads As Under: “That The Notice Issued U/S 153C For This Year, Not Being Consistent With The First Proviso To Section 153C, Is Illegal & The Consequential Order Under Appeal, Passed Thereupon Is Also Illegal.”

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153C

…n if the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the “other person” is one and the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) 13. The ld. Departmental Representative was directed to furnish copy of satisfaction note prepared before assuming jurisdiction in the instant case u/s 153C of the Act and hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2019. 14. On the appointed date, the ld. Departmental Representative filed copy of one satisfaction note and submitted that this common sat…

Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Jazzy B, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle - II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 340/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 337/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 338/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 339/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 340/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 341/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Jazzy B, 10, Seiyu Complex, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Model Town, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amzps7517F Assessee By : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Jalandhar All Dated 14.03.2017 For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal In The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09 Which Reads As Under: “That The Notice Issued U/S 153C For This Year, Not Being Consistent With The First Proviso To Section 153C, Is Illegal & The Consequential Order Under Appeal, Passed Thereupon Is Also Illegal.”

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153C

…n if the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the “other person” is one and the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) 13. The ld. Departmental Representative was directed to furnish copy of satisfaction note prepared before assuming jurisdiction in the instant case u/s 153C of the Act and hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2019. 14. On the appointed date, the ld. Departmental Representative filed copy of one satisfaction note and submitted that this common sat…

Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Jazzy B, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle - II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 339/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 337/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 338/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 339/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 340/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 341/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Jazzy B, 10, Seiyu Complex, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Model Town, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amzps7517F Assessee By : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Jalandhar All Dated 14.03.2017 For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal In The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09 Which Reads As Under: “That The Notice Issued U/S 153C For This Year, Not Being Consistent With The First Proviso To Section 153C, Is Illegal & The Consequential Order Under Appeal, Passed Thereupon Is Also Illegal.”

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153C

…n if the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the “other person” is one and the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) 13. The ld. Departmental Representative was directed to furnish copy of satisfaction note prepared before assuming jurisdiction in the instant case u/s 153C of the Act and hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2019. 14. On the appointed date, the ld. Departmental Representative filed copy of one satisfaction note and submitted that this common sat…

Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Jazzy B, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle - II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 338/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 337/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 338/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 339/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 340/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 341/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Jazzy B, 10, Seiyu Complex, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Model Town, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amzps7517F Assessee By : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Jalandhar All Dated 14.03.2017 For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal In The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09 Which Reads As Under: “That The Notice Issued U/S 153C For This Year, Not Being Consistent With The First Proviso To Section 153C, Is Illegal & The Consequential Order Under Appeal, Passed Thereupon Is Also Illegal.”

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153C

…n if the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the “other person” is one and the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) 13. The ld. Departmental Representative was directed to furnish copy of satisfaction note prepared before assuming jurisdiction in the instant case u/s 153C of the Act and hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2019. 14. On the appointed date, the ld. Departmental Representative filed copy of one satisfaction note and submitted that this common sat…

Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Jazzy B, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle - II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 337/ASR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 337/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 338/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 339/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 340/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 341/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Bains Alia Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Jazzy B, 10, Seiyu Complex, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Model Town, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amzps7517F Assessee By : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Jalandhar All Dated 14.03.2017 For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal In The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09 Which Reads As Under: “That The Notice Issued U/S 153C For This Year, Not Being Consistent With The First Proviso To Section 153C, Is Illegal & The Consequential Order Under Appeal, Passed Thereupon Is Also Illegal.”

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153C

…n if the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the “other person” is one and the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) 13. The ld. Departmental Representative was directed to furnish copy of satisfaction note prepared before assuming jurisdiction in the instant case u/s 153C of the Act and hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2019. 14. On the appointed date, the ld. Departmental Representative filed copy of one satisfaction note and submitted that this common sat…

M/S Kptcl, Bangalore vs. ITO(OSD)(TDS)Ltpu, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2458/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

Section 17(1)(va)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…use the expression “Bonafide” at all and to incorporate the concept of bonafide in proceedings u/s.201(1) of the Act is itself not permissible. In this regard he drew our attention to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwear 362 ITR 673 (SC) ITA No.2379 to 2458/B/2017 Page 17 of 21 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is not permissible to read into a section words which are not present in the section. 15. We have considered the submission of the learned standing counsel and are of the view that Sec.192 of the Act uses the word “estimate” and therefore the stat…

M/S Kptcl, Bangalore vs. ITO(OSD)(TDS)Ltpu, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2457/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

Section 17(1)(va)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…use the expression “Bonafide” at all and to incorporate the concept of bonafide in proceedings u/s.201(1) of the Act is itself not permissible. In this regard he drew our attention to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwear 362 ITR 673 (SC) ITA No.2379 to 2458/B/2017 Page 17 of 21 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is not permissible to read into a section words which are not present in the section. 15. We have considered the submission of the learned standing counsel and are of the view that Sec.192 of the Act uses the word “estimate” and therefore the stat…