Pr. CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm)

403 ITR 259High Court2018#3393 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm) authority for?

Jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act is invalid if no documents belonging to the assessee are found. The satisfaction note must be based on objective facts, and the non-obstante provisions of Sections 153A and 153C do not override the mandatory provisions of Sections 142(2) or 143(2).

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm) · 403 ITR 259 · Section 153C · Section 143(2) · Section 142(2) · jurisdiction · documents belonging to assessee · satisfaction note · objective facts · non-obstante provisions

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69Section 132(4A)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 132(4a)(i)section 292c(1)(i)section 2(7)section 292ccsection 45(2)section 136section 145(1)section 14(1)warrant of authorisationsection 142(2)section 211section 2(47)(v)

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm)

KAVITA GUPTA,EAST DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-31, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1643/DEL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay[Assessment Year: 2020-21]

Section 115BSection 153CSection 69

…. Securities Limited (2016) 380 ITR 612, Del, it is reiterated that "belong to" means ownership. Unless documents are shown to be owned by the assessee Section 153C of the Act cannot be invoked (iii) In the case of PCIT Vs. N.S. Software India Pvt. Ltd. 2018) 403 ITR 259, Del, it has been held that if, no documents "belongs to" the assessee was found then jurisdiction U/s.153C of the Act is invalid and satisfaction must be recorded with respect to such documents and be based on objective facts. Page 4 of 9 (iv) In the case of PCIT Vs. Sarayan Industries Limited (2020) 114 Taxman.Com 257 (All.) it has been reitera…

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

ITA 709/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…(SC) where it is held that when two views are possible on an issue, the view in favour of the assessee has to be preferred. And also many High court also held the same. As in the latest decisions of Honble Delhi High court of Pr. CIT v/s N.S. Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (2018) in which it has been held that “The court also notices in this regard, that the non- obstante provisions in both Sections 153A and 153C are identical; they override Sections 136, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153. However, they do not override the mandatory provisions of Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”. Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. In DCIT S…

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

ITA 708/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…(SC) where it is held that when two views are possible on an issue, the view in favour of the assessee has to be preferred. And also many High court also held the same. As in the latest decisions of Honble Delhi High court of Pr. CIT v/s N.S. Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (2018) in which it has been held that “The court also notices in this regard, that the non- obstante provisions in both Sections 153A and 153C are identical; they override Sections 136, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153. However, they do not override the mandatory provisions of Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”. 10 ITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024 Ashiana Buildpr…

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDIAPUR, UDAIPUE

ITA 707/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…(SC) where it is held that when two views are possible on an issue, the view in favour of the assessee has to be preferred. And also many High court also held the same. As in the latest decisions of Honble Delhi High court of Pr. CIT v/s N.S. Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (2018) in which it has been held that “The court also notices in this regard, that the non- obstante provisions in both Sections 153A and 153C are identical; they override Sections 136, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153. However, they do not override the mandatory provisions of Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”.10 ITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024 Ashiana Buildpro…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL vs. LATE SHRI SHIV KUMAR GARG (THROUGH SMT. SULOCHNA GARG L/H), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2159/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…oked as the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be satisfied that the seized material does not belong to the person referred to in section 153A of the Act i.e. searched person. 28. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. N.S. Software 403 ITR 259 has held as under: “23. This court concurs with the impugned order. In the present case, the Ld. AO has not explained steps taken by him to determine that the seized material belonged to the Assessee Firm. The satisfaction note has been prepared in a standard mechanical format and it does not provide any details about the books of accounts which…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KARNAL, HARYANA vs. JAI BHAGWAN GARG, HARYANA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2158/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…oked as the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be satisfied that the seized material does not belong to the person referred to in section 153A of the Act i.e. searched person. 28. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. N.S. Software 403 ITR 259 has held as under: “23. This court concurs with the impugned order. In the present case, the Ld. AO has not explained steps taken by him to determine that the seized material belonged to the Assessee Firm. The satisfaction note has been prepared in a standard mechanical format and it does not provide any details about the books of accounts which…

RELIABLE REALTECH (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1974/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…oked as the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be satisfied that the seized material does not belong to the person referred to in section 153A of the Act i.e. searched person. 28. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. N.S. Software 403 ITR 259 has held as under: “23. This court concurs with the impugned order. In the present case, the Ld. AO has not explained steps taken by him to determine that the seized material belonged to the Assessee Firm. The satisfaction note has been prepared in a standard mechanical format and it does not provide any details about the books of accounts which…

DECENT REALTECH (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1973/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…oked as the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be satisfied that the seized material does not belong to the person referred to in section 153A of the Act i.e. searched person. 28. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. N.S. Software 403 ITR 259 has held as under: “23. This court concurs with the impugned order. In the present case, the Ld. AO has not explained steps taken by him to determine that the seized material belonged to the Assessee Firm. The satisfaction note has been prepared in a standard mechanical format and it does not provide any details about the books of accounts which…

RAKESH KUMAR BANSAL,GUJRAT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CERCLE , GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 2516/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2515/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Geeta Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Aispb9075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2516/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Rakesh Kumar Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Abwpb1370M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 292CSection 69

…letion of assessment. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT(Central) Kanpur Vs. Moins Iqbal [ITA No. 168/Del/2009 dated 28.07.2017] (Allah.) (HC); 2. Pr. CIT (Central) Vs. Cherian Abraham [444 ITR 420] (Karn.); 3. Pr. CIT Vs. N.S. Software [403 ITR 259]. 16. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that notice u/s 153C of the Act and consequent proceedings are beyond jurisdiction of Assessing Officer being jurisdiction assumed based on the order u/s 127 of the Act which itself is void ab initio. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. “Noorul Islam Educational Trust Vs. CI…

GEETA BANSAL,GUJRAT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 2515/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2515/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Geeta Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Aispb9075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2516/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Rakesh Kumar Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Abwpb1370M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 292CSection 69

…letion of assessment. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT(Central) Kanpur Vs. Moins Iqbal [ITA No. 168/Del/2009 dated 28.07.2017] (Allah.) (HC); 2. Pr. CIT (Central) Vs. Cherian Abraham [444 ITR 420] (Karn.); 3. Pr. CIT Vs. N.S. Software [403 ITR 259]. 16. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that notice u/s 153C of the Act and consequent proceedings are beyond jurisdiction of Assessing Officer being jurisdiction assumed based on the order u/s 127 of the Act which itself is void ab initio. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. “Noorul Islam Educational Trust Vs. CI…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…No.44/2011, I.T.A. No.45/2011 • DCIT .v. Aakash Arogya Mindir (P) Ltd. (2015) 167 TTJ 578 (Delhi)(Trib.) ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 95 of 96 • CIT v. N. S. Software (FIRM) (2018) 403 ITR 259/ 165 DTR 201 / 302 CTR 136/ 255 Taxman 230 (Delhi) (HC) 12.22 Even the jurisdictional high court in the following cases has held that A satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the Assessing Officer before he transmits the records to the Assessing Officer who has jurisdiction over such other person. Not furnishing the reasons for…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…No.44/2011, I.T.A. No.45/2011 • DCIT .v. Aakash Arogya Mindir (P) Ltd. (2015) 167 TTJ 578 (Delhi)(Trib.) ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 95 of 96 • CIT v. N. S. Software (FIRM) (2018) 403 ITR 259/ 165 DTR 201 / 302 CTR 136/ 255 Taxman 230 (Delhi) (HC) 12.22 Even the jurisdictional high court in the following cases has held that A satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the Assessing Officer before he transmits the records to the Assessing Officer who has jurisdiction over such other person. Not furnishing the reasons for…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…No.44/2011, I.T.A. No.45/2011 • DCIT .v. Aakash Arogya Mindir (P) Ltd. (2015) 167 TTJ 578 (Delhi)(Trib.) ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 95 of 96 • CIT v. N. S. Software (FIRM) (2018) 403 ITR 259/ 165 DTR 201 / 302 CTR 136/ 255 Taxman 230 (Delhi) (HC) 12.22 Even the jurisdictional high court in the following cases has held that A satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the Assessing Officer before he transmits the records to the Assessing Officer who has jurisdiction over such other person. Not furnishing the reasons for…

MOHAMMED SHERIEF vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/7/2019HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: MOHAMMED SHERIEFFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…satisfaction for initiating proceedings u/s 153C. It has also been challenged that the documents relied on by the assessing officer for issuing notice u/s 153C are merely dumped documents based on which the assessing officer cannot arrive at a 3 [2018] 403 ITR 259 (Delhi) ITA Nos.2/2019, 5/2019, 6/2019, 8/2019, 7/2019 -17- conclusion that these are documents belonging to the appellant.” and also the ground of appeal filed before the Tribunal. “2. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to make an assessme…

MOHAMMED SHERIEF, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

ITA/2/2019HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: MOHAMMED SHERIEFFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…satisfaction for initiating proceedings u/s 153C. It has also been challenged that the documents relied on by the assessing officer for issuing notice u/s 153C are merely dumped documents based on which the assessing officer cannot arrive at a 3 [2018] 403 ITR 259 (Delhi) ITA Nos.2/2019, 5/2019, 6/2019, 8/2019, 7/2019 -17- conclusion that these are documents belonging to the appellant.” and also the ground of appeal filed before the Tribunal. “2. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to make an assessme…

PALADUGU PRABHAKAR, HYDERABAD,VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 511/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri K.P.R. R.Murthy
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 68Section 69B

…ought to buttress the point that the material. 5. We find no merit in the Revenue’s foregoing arguments. Case laws Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 231 Taxman 58 (Del); Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 370 ITR 215 (Del) and PCIT Vs. N S Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (Del) along with similar other various judicial precedents have already settled the law that such a satisfaction note is indeed a mandatory condition on the Assessing Officer’s part so as to set section 153C proceedings in motion. He is supposed to record that the alleged incriminating and seized material in fact “belongs to” the assessee concern…

PALADUGU PRABHAKAR, HYDERABAD,VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 510/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri K.P.R. R.Murthy
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 68Section 69B

…ought to buttress the point that the material. 5. We find no merit in the Revenue’s foregoing arguments. Case laws Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 231 Taxman 58 (Del); Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 370 ITR 215 (Del) and PCIT Vs. N S Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (Del) along with similar other various judicial precedents have already settled the law that such a satisfaction note is indeed a mandatory condition on the Assessing Officer’s part so as to set section 153C proceedings in motion. He is supposed to record that the alleged incriminating and seized material in fact “belongs to” the assessee concern…

PALADUGU PRABHAKAR, HYDERABAD,VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 509/HYD/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri K.P.R. R.Murthy
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 68Section 69B

…ought to buttress the point that the material. 5. We find no merit in the Revenue’s foregoing arguments. Case laws Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 231 Taxman 58 (Del); Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 370 ITR 215 (Del) and PCIT Vs. N S Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (Del) along with similar other various judicial precedents have already settled the law that such a satisfaction note is indeed a mandatory condition on the Assessing Officer’s part so as to set section 153C proceedings in motion. He is supposed to record that the alleged incriminating and seized material in fact “belongs to” the assessee concern…

PALADUGU PRABHAKAR, ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 675/HYD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani (A.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…er coming across the alleged seized material. 5. We find no merit in the Revenue’s foregoing arguments. Case laws Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 231 Taxman 58 (Del); Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 370 ITR 215 (Del) and PCIT Vs. N S Software (Firm) 403 ITR 259 (Del) along with similar other various judicial precedents have indeed a mandatory condition on the Assessing Officer’s part so as to set section 153C proceedings in motion. He is supposed to record that the alleged incriminating and seized material in fact “belongs to” the assessee concerned as per the statutory position upto 1.6.2015. We thus a…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RANGOLI BUILDTECH (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5015/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs Rangoli Buildtech (P) Ltd., Central Circle-14, 1105, Akash Deep Building, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccr8695P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate & Shri Somil Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sunit Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26Th March, 2014 Of The Cit(A)-33 New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Purchasing & Selling & Developing Of Real Estate. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The It Act, 1961 Was Conducted By The Investigation Wing Of The Department On 22.03.2011 In The Amtek Group Of Cases. The Premises Of M/S Excel Infotech Pvt. Ltd. & Others, 9, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi Was Also Covered U/S 132(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Which Is A Group Company Of Amtek Group. The Documents Belonging To The Assessee, M/S Rangoli Buildtech Pvt Ltd, 1105, Akash Deep Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi- 110001 Were Also Found & Seized From The Premises Of M/S Excel Infotech Pvt Ltd & Others, 9, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi In Whose Name Search Warrant Of Authorization Was Issued. The Assessee'S Case Was Proposed For Centralization By The Investigation Wing For Coordinated Investigation & Assessment U/S 153C & Subsequently It Was Centralized With Central Circle- 14, New Delhi Vide Order F.No Cit(C) Centr/2012- 13/239 Dated 25.04.2012. Accordingly Notice U/S 153C Of The Income Tax Act Was Issued To The Assessee On 08.11.2012. In Response To The Said Notice, The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 05.02.2013 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.6,89,710/-.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sunit Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153C

…he reasons or basis for the conclusion that the AO of the searched person is satisfied that the seized documents belonged to a person other than the searched person. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. NS Software 403 ITR 259, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that the failure of the AO to record a specific satisfaction as to how the recovered material belonged to the assessee in the note that preceded the notice issued under it, vitiates the assessments. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Peps…

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

Pr. CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm) (403 ITR 259) — Cited in 35 Judgments | BharatTax