“satisfaction note”

Ambawatt Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (C), Gurgaon

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Ambawatt Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr. Cit (C), Kh 267, 1St Floor, 7Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, Chatterpur Enclave, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Mehrauli, Gurgaon. New Delhi. Pan: Aagca0991B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Satpal Gulati, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17Th February, 2017 Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Cit, Central, Gurgaon, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014, Declaring Nil Income. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Compulsory Scrutiny & A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee On 20Th September, 2015. Notice U/S 142(1) Along With A Questionnaire Was Also Issued On 12Th May, 2016. In Response To The Statutory Notices Issued By The Ao, The Assessee Appeared Before Him From Time To Time & Furnished Replies Which Were Kept On Record. The Ao, On The Basis Of Various Details Furnished Before Him, Disallowed An Amount Of Rs.3,91,936/- U/S 40A(3) Out Of Car Repairs & Maintenance & Determined The Total Loss Of The Assessee At Rs.94,25,270/- As Against The Returned Loss Of Rs.98,17,203/-.

Accordingly the revenue has reopened the assessment of assessee for AYs 2006-07 to 2012-13 which is evident from the copy of satisfaction note placed at Page No-2 of the Paper Book. The ld. Counsel for the assessee drew the attention of the Bench to following dates which ... Seized documents belonging to assessee were received by Page No-30- of Central Circle. Paper Book, ITAT order for AY 2010-11 03.10.2013 Satisfaction note has been recorded by the AO of the Pg No-30 of the assessee and notice under section 153C of the Act was also

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Madhvilata Granite (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shr Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

inventories of shares as given in balance sheet already on record, rather than any incriminating or seized documents or anything mentioned in the satisfaction note. 4. In first appeal, Ld CIT (A) has deleted the said additions on merits, on the ground that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the identity ... issue, whether cases falling under section 153C, the period of six years have to be reckoned from the date of recording of satisfaction note or from the date of search carried out in a case of a person provided in Section 153A. This precise issue has been dealt

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Madhvilata Granite (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shr Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

inventories of shares as given in balance sheet already on record, rather than any incriminating or seized documents or anything mentioned in the satisfaction note. 4. In first appeal, Ld CIT (A) has deleted the said additions on merits, on the ground that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the identity ... issue, whether cases falling under section 153C, the period of six years have to be reckoned from the date of recording of satisfaction note or from the date of search carried out in a case of a person provided in Section 153A. This precise issue has been dealt

Mikado Realtors (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (Central), Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

incriminating nor having a 5 bearing on determination of total income therefore, notice under section 142(1) of the Act on the basis of satisfaction note is, an invalid notice and; in any case, the order under section 143(3)/153C of the Act is an invalid order which could ... assessment year 2017-18. v) 25.09.2018 That proceedings u/s.153C of the Act was initiated on the basis of a satisfaction note. 3. Brief facts qua this issue are that, a search and seizure operation was initiated on M/s. M3M Group u/s.131 on 21.07.2016 and in pursuance to the aforesaid search

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sohan Singh Dhingra (HUF), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in holding that proper satisfaction has not been recorded when satisfaction note is available on re cords of the searched parties as well as the assessee and assessing officer is the same. 4. On the facts and circumstances

Vinod Kumar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

instead of passing the Order under section 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961. He has submitted that A.O. has not recorded any satisfaction note under section 153C of the I.T. Act and has referred the reply Dated 20.05.2020 under RTI Act in which A.O. has specifically admitted that no such ... Delhi. recorded in assessment year under appeal and the same have not been found-out from the record. He has submitted that no satisfaction note have been recorded in the case of the person searched, therefore, assessment order is invalid and bad in Law. He has submitted that

The Co-Operative Company Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

order passed in the case of Lords Distillery Ltd. (supra) and pin-pointed item number 14 (being assessee’s name) of the common satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer. It was his contention that while referring to the satisfaction note, the Assessing Officer has to record a firm finding ... application at all on the facts of the cases in hand. In this judgment, the Hon'ble High Court has only examined whether a satisfaction note prepared in the case of the person other than the person searched by the same Assessing Officer in the file of the person searched

M/S. the Cooperative Company Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

order passed in the case of Lords Distillery Ltd. (supra) and pin-pointed item number 14 (being assessee’s name) of the common satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer. It was his contention that while referring to the satisfaction note, the Assessing Officer has to record a firm finding ... application at all on the facts of the cases in hand. In this judgment, the Hon'ble High Court has only examined whether a satisfaction note prepared in the case of the person other than the person searched by the same Assessing Officer in the file of the person searched

M/S. the Cooperative Company Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

order passed in the case of Lords Distillery Ltd. (supra) and pin-pointed item number 14 (being assessee’s name) of the common satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer. It was his contention that while referring to the satisfaction note, the Assessing Officer has to record a firm finding ... application at all on the facts of the cases in hand. In this judgment, the Hon'ble High Court has only examined whether a satisfaction note prepared in the case of the person other than the person searched by the same Assessing Officer in the file of the person searched

M/S. the Cooperative Company Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

order passed in the case of Lords Distillery Ltd. (supra) and pin-pointed item number 14 (being assessee’s name) of the common satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer. It was his contention that while referring to the satisfaction note, the Assessing Officer has to record a firm finding ... application at all on the facts of the cases in hand. In this judgment, the Hon'ble High Court has only examined whether a satisfaction note prepared in the case of the person other than the person searched by the same Assessing Officer in the file of the person searched

DCIT, Central Circle- 1, Faridabad vs. Aadyant Education Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

addition before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the impugned order that A.O. has submitted before him that satisfaction note is appended only with the records of the assessee-company and that there is no such satisfaction appended in the case of CHD Developers Group ... Cases i.e., searched-person. The assessee, therefore, submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that no satisfaction note of the A.O. of the searched-person was recorded before invoking the provisions of Section 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and in the absence thereof, the A.O. was not justified in assuming

Sh. Ghanshyam Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

material found during the search of Rajdarbar Group at the premises belonging to Rajdarbar Group of companies. The AO did not refer to any satisfaction note of the assessing officer that these documents belong to the appellant’s undisclosed income. Further assessment was also not made u/s 153C as required ... assessment was taken up for scrutiny on the ground of material found during search. AO has merely referred to notice u/s 153C but no satisfaction note was mentioned in the assessment order. The assessee in order to buy peace did not challenge these legal issues before the lower authorities

Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 48(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

ground 2 ITA.No.1783/Del./2019 Shri Karan Khurana, Delhi. that impugned reassessment order has been passed without providing copy of reasons recorded along with satisfaction note of approving authority u/s 151 of IT Act despite specific request made by the appellant during assessment proceedings. Therefore, the resultant order of reassessment

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Quality Synthetics Industries Ltd., Kolkata

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

seized. Proceedings u/s 153C in assessee’s case was initiated on 31/12/2015 and notice u/s 153C read with Section 153A was issued after recording satisfaction note accordingly. The assessee vide its reply dated 13/01/2016 submitted that in the assessee’s case no incriminating document was seized and anything relating ... confirmed. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that no incriminating material was found which was related to the assessee company. From the perusal of the satisfaction note also it can be seen that there was nothing on record which related to the assessee company. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. V.K.Narang HUF

inter alia, recorded as follows: “44. In the result, we hold that for the purpose of Section 158BD of the Act a satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the assessing officer before he transmits the records to the other assessing officer who has jurisdiction over ... such other person. The satisfaction note could be prepared at either of the following stages: (a) at the time of or along with the initiation of proceedings against the searched person under Section 158BC of the Act; (b) along with the assessment proceedings under Section 158BC

Commissionr of Incomet Ax vs. Alka Bhandari

judgment had directed as follows: “44. In the result, we hold that for the purpose of Section 158BD of the Act a satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the assessing officer before he transmits the records to the other assessing officer who has jurisdiction over ... such other person. The satisfaction note could be prepared at either of the following stages: (a) at the time of or along with the initiation of proceedings against the searched person under Section 158BC of the Act; (b) along with the assessment proceedings under Section 158BC

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Raghubir Singh Garg

In the result, we hold that for the purpose of

passed the block assessment order in the case of M/s Friends Portfolio Private Limited, on the basis of seized material recorded the following satisfaction note:- “Your assessee Shri Raghubir Singh Garg, Room No. 6, 1st Floor, 2897, Kishan Mkt., Hauz Quazi, Delhi-6 has received a total amount of Rs.21 ... order passed by the tribunal dated 30th September, 2009, it has been held that the block assessment proceedings were not validly initiated as the satisfaction note was recorded by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, New Delhi on 16th 2014:DHC:4199-DB ITA No. 1420/2010 Page

The Commissioner of Income Tax Xiii vs. Radhey Shyam Bansal

Section 158BD did not refer to any satisfaction of the assessing officer of Manoj Aggarwal. It is noteworthy that the tribunal referred to the satisfaction note dated 22.3.2004 which is a note recorded by the assessing officer of the assessee – respondent but not that of the assessing officer of Manoj ... accommodation book entries or the amounts belong to the respondent assessee. Book entries were provided to third parties. It is not stated in this ‗satisfaction note‘ that Manoj Aggarwal or third parties had paid any amount towards commission for acting as a mediator. There is no such allegation or statement