← All Phrases

“satisfaction note”

Search & SeizureSection 153CSection 153C2,598 judgments

The decision most relied on for satisfaction note is CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd. (380 ITR 612), cited in 689 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on satisfaction note

CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd.
380 ITR 612 · 2016 · High Court
689
citing judgments

Completed assessments can be interfered with under Section 153A or 153C only on the basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search, necessitating a direct correlation between the discovered material and the power to assess or reopen concluded assessments.

CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears
362 ITR 673 · 2014 · Supreme Court
528
citing judgments

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.

ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
394 ITR 569 · 2017 · High Court
282
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and specifically relate to the assessment years for which assessments are reopened. A document relevant only for one year cannot be used to reopen other assessment years without being incriminating for those years.

PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd.
465 ITR 101 · 2024 · High Court
277
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, the commencement point for calculating the six or ten assessment year block period is the date of issuing the Section 153C notice, or the date of the satisfaction note/handing over of books, as clarified by the first proviso to Section 153C(1).

DCIT v. Sunil Kumar Sharma
159 Taxmann.com 179 · 2024 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper containing jottings, not shown to be part of regularly maintained books of accounts, do not constitute incriminating material for initiating assessment under section 153C. The satisfaction note required for 153C proceedings must specify the assessment year to which the alleged incriminating material belongs.

Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. ACIT
370 ITR 295 · 2015 · High Court
249
citing judgments

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act is invoked only when it is established that seized documents do not belong to the searched person, or if the searched person disclaims them; the satisfaction note must specifically indicate this fact.

Manish Maheshwari v. ACIT
289 ITR 341 · 2007 · Supreme Court
237
citing judgments

A block assessment proceeding under section 158BD is illegal if the procedure laid down in section 153C is not followed. The provisions of section 153C are similar to section 158BD in block assessment proceedings.

Pepsi Foods (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
367 ITR 112 · 2014 · High Court
225
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a specific satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer of the person searched, recorded prior to initiating proceedings, is a jurisdictional prerequisite, rendering its absence void. The approval function under Section 153D is administrative and does not require elaborate reasoning.

Judgments citing satisfaction note

Shri K G Rajesh, Chikamagalur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1653/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri V Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Vandana Sagar, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153CSection 263

favour of the assessee where he has held that "I have examined the assessment records of Sri,HB.Sudarshan, the Person searched and perused the Satisfaction Note prepared by the assessing officer of the Person searched in order to initiate the proceedings u/s 153C in the case of the Appellant ... said satisfaction note is prepared on 1510912014. The contention of the Appellant that the date of search or the date of receipt of books of accounts /documents /valuables seized cannot be a date not earlier to 1510912014 and hence the applicable Previous Year shall be the financial year

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Acme Computers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee in CO No

ITA 1732/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153Section 153A(1)Section 153BSection 153CSection 68

seizure operations were conducted on 21.03.2007 in Surya Vinayak Group of cases and the assessee is one of the group companies. After recording satisfaction note, statutory notice was issued and served upon the assessee. 6. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to file source, genuineness ... Para 9 of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal reveals that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had scanned through the satisfaction note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to the assessment year 2004-05 or thereafter. After

Dy CIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. Dr. D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

ITA 1035/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153CSection 80G

have been initiated. 5. On the basis of relevant seized material unearthed during the course of search and statement recorded during search operation, a satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act was received from the Assessing Officer (for short ‘the AO’) of the searched person ... assessee trust after recording satisfaction note issued notices under section 153C of the Act for the years under consideration. In response to the notice issued by the AO under section 153C of the Act, the assessee trust filed a return of income. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that

Dy CIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. Dr. D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

ITA 1034/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153CSection 80G

have been initiated. 5. On the basis of relevant seized material unearthed during the course of search and statement recorded during search operation, a satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act was received from the Assessing Officer (for short ‘the AO’) of the searched person ... assessee trust after recording satisfaction note issued notices under section 153C of the Act for the years under consideration. In response to the notice issued by the AO under section 153C of the Act, the assessee trust filed a return of income. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that

Dy CIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. Dr. D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

ITA 1033/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153CSection 80G

have been initiated. 5. On the basis of relevant seized material unearthed during the course of search and statement recorded during search operation, a satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act was received from the Assessing Officer (for short ‘the AO’) of the searched person ... assessee trust after recording satisfaction note issued notices under section 153C of the Act for the years under consideration. In response to the notice issued by the AO under section 153C of the Act, the assessee trust filed a return of income. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that

M/S. Simtools Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7(3) ( Earstwhile DCIT- Cent. Cir-42), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed as above

ITA 1574/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 32(1)Section 79

Central Circle–7(3). That it is gathered that the Assessing Officer of the searched persons i.e., Lodha Group of cases recorded the satisfaction note mentioning therein the reason for a notice to be issued under section 153C of the Act in the case of the assessee company and thereafter ... director of the assessees company admitting the on money transactions, car parking and sale of flats. He held that the asseseees allegation that satisfaction note is based on surmise and conjectures is not sustainable. Hence, he held that ingredient of 153C have been satisfied in the present case. Hence

Shri D.Dasappa, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 2223/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri L. Bharath, CAFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Shoury Arya, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153CSection 2(14)Section 80

order itself cannot be interpreted as the required satisfaction to act u/s 153C. 4. The learned Commissioner was in error in holding that the satisfaction note had been reproduced in the assessment order which is not factually correct and also in concluding that with respect to the taxed amount, fresh ... provisions of Section 153C of the Act. Para 9 of the order of the ITAT reveals that the ITAT had scanned through the Satisfaction Note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to Assessment Year 2004-05 or thereafter. After

Shri D.Dasappa, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 2222/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri L. Bharath, CAFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Shoury Arya, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153CSection 2(14)Section 80

order itself cannot be interpreted as the required satisfaction to act u/s 153C. 4. The learned Commissioner was in error in holding that the satisfaction note had been reproduced in the assessment order which is not factually correct and also in concluding that with respect to the taxed amount, fresh ... provisions of Section 153C of the Act. Para 9 of the order of the ITAT reveals that the ITAT had scanned through the Satisfaction Note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to Assessment Year 2004-05 or thereafter. After

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Golf Link Hospitality P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6413/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Golf Link Hospitality Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-1, F-302, Aditya Commercial, Noida Plot No. 12, Preetvihar Community Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aadcg5239R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriMayankPatawari, CAFor Respondent: ShriGovindSinghal, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 250(6)

erred in law while holding that there was no incriminating material for the issuance of notice u/s 153C, without appreciating that in the satisfaction note the AO had clearly brought out all the facts and circumstances, which indicated that the names of the entities including the assessee, appearing on seized ... were found to be engaged in routing the unaccounted funds by layering through various entities including assessee, controlled by them as mentioned in the satisfaction note, therefore the mere fact that the entries were recorded in regular balance sheet of the beneficiary could no? by itself allow the treatment

Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-21, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2086/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2014-15 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Vs Addl. Cit, Ltd., Range-21, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23Rd January, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-7, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal No. 1 & 2 Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. That Both The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Ao Erred In Law & In Facts In Disallowance Of Rs.1,08,69,547/- U/S 14A In A Mechanical Way Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessee Himself Has Disallowed Rs 2.41 Lakhs & That There Cannot Be Any Further Disallowance U/S 14A Without A Cogent Reason. 2. That Both The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Ao Erred In Law & In Facts In Appreciating That Strategic Investments In Dabur India Limited As The Promoter Shareholder, Would Not Form Part Of Disallowance U/S 14A.”

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 14A

record his satisfaction in clear terms about the nature of expenses incurred by the assessee to earn the dividend and that satisfaction note has to be recorded with reference to the accounting entries made in the books of account. However, the AO, in the instant case, has not done ... order dated 13.11.2019, submitted that the Tribunal has deleted the disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A(2) of the Act in absence of satisfaction note. He submitted that since no expenditure has been incurred by the assessee to earn the dividend income from Ayurvet Ltd. and Dabur India

Sambhavanath Infrabuild Farms (Successor to Lodha Construction P. Ltd P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT, Central Circle-7(3), Mumbai

ITA 1897/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blesambhavnath Infrabuild & Farms Pvt. Ltd., V. Asst. Cit– Central Circle – 7(3) {Successor To Lodha Construction Pvt. Ltd.,} Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai - 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aalcs1394M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153ASection 69D

available in NJRS at 2014-LL-0312-51) has laid down that for the purpose of Section 158BD of the Act, recording of a satisfaction note is a prerequisite and the satisfaction note must be prepared by the AO before he transmits the record to the other ... jurisdiction over such other person u/s 158BD, The Hon'ble Court held that the satisfaction note could be prepared at any of the following stages: (a) at the time of or along with the initiation of proceedings against the searched person under Section 158BC

Sri Anjaneyalu Prathipathi, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2838/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Years: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar, CIT(TP-2-DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 153CSection 2Section 234

prejudice to the above, the learned CIT[A] is not justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the copy of the satisfaction note recorded for initiating proceedings u/s. 153C of the Act, since the same was not challenged before the ld.AO, under the facts

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Golf Link Hospitality P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6414/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 153C

erred in law while holding that there was no incriminating material for the issuance of notice u/s 153C, without appreciating that in the satisfaction note the AO had clearly brought out all the facts and circumstances, which indicated that the names of the entities including the assessee, appearing on seized ... were found to be engaged in routing the unaccounted funds by layering through various entities including assessee, controlled by them as mentioned in the satisfaction note, therefore the mere fact that the entries were recorded in regular balance sheet of the beneficiary could not by itself allow the treatment

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mapsa Tapes Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3539/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. AggarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153C

section 153A of the Act and disposing off the objection filed by the assessee to initiation of assessment proceedings. ii. In absence of any satisfaction note recorded in the case of searched person namely M/s. Mapsa Logistics Pvt. Ltd. And M/s .Mapsa Infra Pvt. Ltd., the assumption of jurisdiction ... initiate proceedings under section153C of the Act against the assessee was illegal, invalid and untenable. i. The satisfaction note of the AO in the case of the searched person namely M/s. Mapsa Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Mapsa Infra Pvt. Ltd. did not refer to any material found from

ITO, Ward- 25(3), New Delhi vs. Time Bound Contracts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3909/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2006-04 With Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

assessment as well as in the appellate proceedings, the AR of the appellant contended that since the AO has received the satisfaction note of the AO of the searched person along with relevant seized documents only on 05.04.2013, therefore the assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act can be initiated ... seized documents in question belong to the appellant, and handed them over to the AO of the appellant vide letter dated 29/03/2013. From the satisfaction note recorded by the AO of the appellant, it has been noted that the same were received by him only on 05/04/2013, and subsequently

ITO, Ward- 25(3), New Delhi vs. Time Bound Contracts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3906/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2006-04 With Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

assessment as well as in the appellate proceedings, the AR of the appellant contended that since the AO has received the satisfaction note of the AO of the searched person along with relevant seized documents only on 05.04.2013, therefore the assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act can be initiated ... seized documents in question belong to the appellant, and handed them over to the AO of the appellant vide letter dated 29/03/2013. From the satisfaction note recorded by the AO of the appellant, it has been noted that the same were received by him only on 05/04/2013, and subsequently

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sh. Subash Dabas, New Delhi

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the

ITA 6701/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 127Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 194CSection 2(22)(e)Section 68Section 69

under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules and urged additional grounds against the findings of the CIT(A) pertaining to the issue of recording of satisfaction note, and the necessary condition of existence of nexus between assessment and incriminating material by contending that these findings were in the teeth

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sh. Subash Dabas, New Delhi

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the

ITA 6700/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 127Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 194CSection 2(22)(e)Section 68Section 69

under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules and urged additional grounds against the findings of the CIT(A) pertaining to the issue of recording of satisfaction note, and the necessary condition of existence of nexus between assessment and incriminating material by contending that these findings were in the teeth

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. C S Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2894/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

remand report furnished by the Assessing Officer during the course of appeal proceedings, that the Assessing Officer of the searched person had not recorded satisfaction note to the effect that the seized documents did not belong to his assessee, i.e., the person searched upon, but belonged to another person ... remand report furnished by the Assessing Officer during the course of appeal proceedings, that the Assessing Officer of the searched person had not recorded satisfaction note to the effect that the seized documents did not belong to his assessee, i.e., the person searched upon, but belonged to another person

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Karat 87 Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2885/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

remand report furnished by the Assessing Officer during the course of appeal proceedings, that the Assessing Officer of the searched person had not recorded satisfaction note to the effect that the seized documents did not belong to his assessee, i.e., the person searched upon, but belonged to another person ... remand report furnished by the Assessing Officer during the course of appeal proceedings, that the Assessing Officer of the searched person had not recorded satisfaction note to the effect that the seized documents did not belong to his assessee, i.e., the person searched upon, but belonged to another person