Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT

423 ITR 281Supreme Court of India2020#1809 most cited

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

For Section 153C assessments, distinct satisfaction must be recorded for each assessment year, establishing a live and direct nexus between seized material and the relevant year to assume jurisdiction. However, if the Assessing Officer for both the searched person and the assessed person is the same, a single satisfaction recorded in the capacity of the AO of the assessed person is sufficient.

63

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT · Section 153C satisfaction · distinct satisfaction for each year · AO of searched and assessed person same · single satisfaction sufficient · live and direct nexus · assumption of jurisdiction · seized material · Section 132 search assessment · jurisdiction under Section 153C

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 132Section 69Section 131Section 142(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 292C

Issues it is cited on

arbitrary and capricioussection 269stsection 132(1)(a)section 43(3)section 158bdsection 163section 245csection 153c(1)settlement applicationon money receiptsection 158b(b)income tax settlement commission

Judgments citing Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT

AJAY GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5149/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M Balaganeshajay Gupta, Vs. Dcit, 35, Rajpura Road, Civil Central Circle-31, Lines, Majnu Ka Tilla New Delhi Area, Civil Lines, So North Delhi, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakpg6283H

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 144Section 153B(1)(b)Section 153C

…Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vijay Bihari Kandhari Vs. ACIT in Writ Petition No. 2764 of 2022 dated 17.11.2025 wherein, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls Pvt. Ltd Vs. PCIT 423 ITR 281 wherein, it is held that the requirement of transmitting the documents seized from the searched person would not arise if the AO of the searched person and the other person is one and same. There is no question of transmitting such seized documents to oneself. The ld counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Supre…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. RAMASAMY RAJASEHAR, PERAMBALUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3336/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 69

…, must not only be contemporaneous and in writing, but must also be specifically relatable to each of the six assessment years proposed to be reopened. 29. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so, strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)]…

OM LAMCOAT PVT LTD,MORBI vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 287/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 250

…ommon satisfaction, both the process has been achieved as the AO is common for ITA No. 286 & 287/RJT/2025 M/s. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. the searched person as well as the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court the case of Super Malls Private Limited vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 had considered its own judgement in the Pr. CIT vs. Calcutta Knitwears and laid down clear law that single satisfaction note is sufficient in case of same AO of searched person and other person for the purpose of issuing valid notice u/s 153C of the Act. Therefore, ld.CIT(A) did not find any defect in the common satisfaction recorded by the AO of…

OM LAMCOAT PVT LTD,MORBI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 286/RJT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 250

…ommon satisfaction, both the process has been achieved as the AO is common for ITA No. 286 & 287/RJT/2025 M/s. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. the searched person as well as the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court the case of Super Malls Private Limited vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 had considered its own judgement in the Pr. CIT vs. Calcutta Knitwears and laid down clear law that single satisfaction note is sufficient in case of same AO of searched person and other person for the purpose of issuing valid notice u/s 153C of the Act. Therefore, ld.CIT(A) did not find any defect in the common satisfaction recorded by the AO of…

RANGAMANI KRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 457/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…t have any substance for seeking intervention as sought for by the appellant / Revenue.” :-11-: ITA. Nos:453 to 457/Chny/2025 & SA Nos.41 to 45/Chny/2025 15. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)] and…

RANGAMANI KRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 456/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…t have any substance for seeking intervention as sought for by the appellant / Revenue.” :-11-: ITA. Nos:453 to 457/Chny/2025 & SA Nos.41 to 45/Chny/2025 15. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)] and…

RANGAMANI KRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 455/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…t have any substance for seeking intervention as sought for by the appellant / Revenue.” :-11-: ITA. Nos:453 to 457/Chny/2025 & SA Nos.41 to 45/Chny/2025 15. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)] and…

RANGAMANI KRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 454/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…t have any substance for seeking intervention as sought for by the appellant / Revenue.” :-11-: ITA. Nos:453 to 457/Chny/2025 & SA Nos.41 to 45/Chny/2025 15. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)] and…

RANGAMANI KRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 453/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…t have any substance for seeking intervention as sought for by the appellant / Revenue.” :-11-: ITA. Nos:453 to 457/Chny/2025 & SA Nos.41 to 45/Chny/2025 15. This view is further fortified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC)], wherein it was laid down that the satisfaction contemplated u/s.153C of the Act is a sine qua non for the assumption of jurisdiction and must be recorded distinctly for each year. A failure to do so strikes at the root of the assessment. Moreover, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2014) 367 ITR 112 (Del)] and…

ASHOK BHARTI GOSWAMI,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1272/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

ASHISH RAMESH OSWAL,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

ITA 1271/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

ADISH SHANTILAL SOLANKI,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1270/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

CHITRA NARENDRA PARMAR,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1269/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

RAMLAL BHIKULAL SHAH,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1268/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

DEEPAK KANTILAL JAIN ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1267/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

DEEPAK KANTILAL JAIN,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1265/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

RAMANLAL BHIKULAL SHAH,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1264/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

CHITRA NARENDRA PARMAR ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE , PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1262/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…Settlement Commission does not have power to direct a special audit under section 142(2A) in course of settlement proceedings under Chapter XIX-A. 54. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) 423 ITR 281 (SC), the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that in terms of section 153C, when Assessing Officer of searched person and third person is same, it is sufficient by Assessing Officer to record in satisfaction note that documents seized from searched person belonged to other person and, there is no require…

SMT.PREMA DEVI, L/R OF LATE.SHRI. DHARMICHAND,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result all the five appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 564/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 563 To 567/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2012-13 Smt. Prema Devi, The Deputy Commissioner Of L/R. Of Late. Shri. Dharmichand Jain, Vs. Income Tax, No.37, Arumuga Achari Street, Central Circle 2(1), Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan:Avspp-5090-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 153CSection 153D

…jurisdictional AO of the “other person”, who must independently apply his mind and record his own satisfaction. In support of the above submission the ld.AR relies on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT [(2020) 423 ITR 281. 30. In the present case, for the assessment years AY 2008-09 to AY 2012-13, there is a complete absence of proper and independent satisfaction as required u/s.153C of the Act. In particular: :-13-: ITA. Nos.:563 to 567/Chny/2023 a. There is no contemporaneous recording of satisfaction by the AO of the person searched linking the seized materi…

M/S. KISHOR D NAIK (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, THANE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 5587/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 292C

…the Act.\n6.7 In the instant case, the Assessing Officer of the searched person\nand the assessed person or other person is the same and therefore,\nhe has recorded only one satisfaction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court\nin the case of Super Malls P Ltd Vs PCIT in 423 ITR 281(SC) held\nthat where the AO of searched person and assessed person is one\nand same, there is no requirement of handing over of the assets or\nbooks of account or document and no need to record two satisfaction\nand satisfaction in the capacity of AO of assessed person is\nsufficient. To this extent, we don't find any infirmity in the finding of\…

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4

Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (423 ITR 281) — Cited in 63 Judgments | BharatTax