← 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

Farooqi Gulamsamdani, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle - 1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 814/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.814/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Farooqi Gulam Samdani, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aispg5022C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-AR
Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 69

Calcutta Knitwears (supra) submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had clearly stated 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 ... jurisdiction over such other person. The satisfaction note prepared 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 u/s. 158BC of the Act; (b) along with the assessment proceedings u/s. 158BC

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Light House Movie Makers LLP, Hyderabad

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

ITA 319/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2015-16) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Hyderabad Pan: Adopk6018R (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Vs. M/S. Light House Movie Makers Llp, Hyderabad. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Pan: Aagfl8979H (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr 18/11/2025 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.М. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

assessment proceedings u/s 153C without appreciating the fact that seized material for the relevant period was there and was also mentioned in the satisfaction note for the A.Y 2015-16 (combined with other. assessment years). 5. The Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that a combined satisfaction note cannot ... substance of the arguments are that, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153C of the Act dated 30.06.2022 on the basis of satisfaction note recorded u/s.153C of the Act is invalid, bad in law and liable to be quashed because, the Assessing Officer has not arrived at satisfaction

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Light House Movie Makers LLP, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 318/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Vs. Hyderabad Tax, Pan : Adopk6018R Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Light House Movie Makers Vs. Llp, Hyderabad. Tax, Pan : Aagfl8979H Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessees By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.M. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

For Respondent: Smt. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

substance of the arguments are that, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153C of the Act dated 30.06.2022 on the basis of satisfaction note recorded u/s.153C of the Act is invalid, bad in law and liable to be quashed because, the Assessing Officer has not arrived at satisfaction ... income without referring to any particulars of income to which assessment year or any particular assessment year it pertains to and thus the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer dated 30.06.2022 as required u/s.153C of the Act failed to comply with the parameters of satisfaction u/s.153C

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Atchi Reddy Kovuuri, Hhyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 297/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Vs. Hyderabad Tax, Pan : Adopk6018R Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Light House Movie Makers Vs. Llp, Hyderabad. Tax, Pan : Aagfl8979H Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessees By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.M. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

For Respondent: Smt. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

substance of the arguments are that, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153C of the Act dated 30.06.2022 on the basis of satisfaction note recorded u/s.153C of the Act is invalid, bad in law and liable to be quashed because, the Assessing Officer has not arrived at satisfaction ... income without referring to any particulars of income to which assessment year or any particular assessment year it pertains to and thus the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer dated 30.06.2022 as required u/s.153C of the Act failed to comply with the parameters of satisfaction u/s.153C