← 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

Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad vs. Asma Estates & Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 37/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.37/Hyd/2021 To 39/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Asma Estates & Income Tax Investments Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2191F] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 13/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

Assessing Officer of the assessee along with the copy of the seized material on 14.02.2019. After received and further verification of the satisfaction note and 4 ITA No.37-39/Hyd/2021 Asma Estates & Investments Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad copies of seized material, the Assessing Officer recorded satisfaction as required u/s 153C, with reference ... Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee challenged the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153C of the Act, in light of satisfaction note u/s 153A / 153C by the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the Assessing Officer of the assessee and submitted that the Assessing Officer

A.C.I.T., Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Jaideep Halwasiya, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2284/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Jaideep Halwasiya Acit, Central Circle-4(3) 3Rd Floor, P-34, India Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Exchange Place, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aawph1706L Co No. 50/Kol/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2284/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16) Jaideep Halwasiya Acit, Central Circle-4(3) 3Rd Floor, P-34, India Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Exchange Place, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Guru Bhashyam, Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bhashyam, DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

timeline of 6 assessment years. According to the ld CIT(A) the date of search and not the date of satisfaction note has to be considered for the purpose of reckoning the period of 6 years assessment years. The ld. CIT (A) dismissed the plea of the assessee by relying ... section 153C and 153A of the Act which is the one and the same. Ld CIT(A). Prior to the amendment date a satisfaction note used to be considered as date of initiation of search for the purpose of section 153C of the Act. However, 01.04.2017, there is no different