PCIT v. Super Malls Pvt. Ltd.

393 ITR 557High Court2017#654 most cited

What is PCIT v. Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

A satisfaction note under section 153C is not invalid on hyper-technical grounds like literal interpretation of 'belonging to' if the Assessing Officer has satisfied himself with the contents of seized documents, even if those documents belong to a third party.

152

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. · section 153C · satisfaction note · seized documents · third party · belonging to · hyper technical ground · invalid satisfaction note

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing PCIT v. Super Malls Pvt. Ltd.

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Srg Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3263/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Srg Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-07, 8-A/3, Wea, Karol Bagh, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aajcs1335C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Khiwani, Ca Revenue By : Mrs. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-24, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The Income Tax Act Was Carried Out On M/S Satya Parkash & Brothers Group Of Cases On 28.10.2010 Headed By Sh. Satya Prakash Gupta. M/S S.R.G. Infrastructures P. Ltd. Is One Of The Associate Companies Of The Group. During Search On The Group, Certain Documents Relating To M/S S.R.G. Infrastructures P. Ltd. Were Found & Seized. The Assessing Officer Accordingly Issued Notice U/S 153C Of The Act On 8Th May, 2012 Requiring The Assessee To File Return Of Income Within 15 Days From The Service Of Notice U/S 153C Of The It Act, 1961. The Assessee, Vide Letter Dated 27.11.2012, Submitted That The Return Already Filed On 30Th March, 2012 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,270/- May Be Treated As Return Filed In Response To Notice U/S 153C Of The It Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Objected To The Notice Issued U/S 153C Terming The Same As Illegal. The Assessing Officer Disposed Of That Objection And, Thereafter, Proceeded To Complete The Assessment. Rejecting Various Explanations Given By The Assessee From Time To Time, The Assessing Officer Determined The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.1,43,23,550/-.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar Khiwani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 ACIT, Vs SRG Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-07, 8-A/3, WEA, Karol Bagh, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAJCS1335C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Khiwani, CA Revenue by : Mrs. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 24th March, 2015 o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Urmila Chandulal Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1459/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…erusal and despite of being given several opportunities no submission on merits of case was made by assessee, assessment order passed under said section to make additions was justified. 4. PCIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd T20161 76 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) / T20171 393 ITR 557 (Delhi)/f20171 291 CTR 142 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where Assessing Officer had issued satisfaction note under section 153C after satisfying himself with contents of documents seized, Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on hyper technical ground of incorrect terminologyTised in said note. Satisfaction note recorded u/…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Krish Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1458/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…erusal and despite of being given several opportunities no submission on merits of case was made by assessee, assessment order passed under said section to make additions was justified. 4. PCIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd T20161 76 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) / T20171 393 ITR 557 (Delhi)/f20171 291 CTR 142 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where Assessing Officer had issued satisfaction note under section 153C after satisfying himself with contents of documents seized, Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on hyper technical ground of incorrect terminologyTised in said note. Satisfaction note recorded u/…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Praduman Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1457/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…erusal and despite of being given several opportunities no submission on merits of case was made by assessee, assessment order passed under said section to make additions was justified. 4. PCIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd T20161 76 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) / T20171 393 ITR 557 (Delhi)/f20171 291 CTR 142 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where Assessing Officer had issued satisfaction note under section 153C after satisfying himself with contents of documents seized, Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on hyper technical ground of incorrect terminologyTised in said note. Satisfaction note recorded u/…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Himanshu Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1456/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…erusal and despite of being given several opportunities no submission on merits of case was made by assessee, assessment order passed under said section to make additions was justified. 4. PCIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd T20161 76 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) / T20171 393 ITR 557 (Delhi)/f20171 291 CTR 142 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where Assessing Officer had issued satisfaction note under section 153C after satisfying himself with contents of documents seized, Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on hyper technical ground of incorrect terminologyTised in said note. Satisfaction note recorded u/…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Rohan Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1455/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…erusal and despite of being given several opportunities no submission on merits of case was made by assessee, assessment order passed under said section to make additions was justified. 4. PCIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd T20161 76 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) / T20171 393 ITR 557 (Delhi)/f20171 291 CTR 142 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where Assessing Officer had issued satisfaction note under section 153C after satisfying himself with contents of documents seized, Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on hyper technical ground of incorrect terminologyTised in said note. Satisfaction note recorded u/…