← 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

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S Ruby Realty Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 1030/CHNY/2022[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1030/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ruby Realty Private Limited, Income Tax, Office B 908, Radiance Shine Central Circle 3(4), Apartments, Kazhipattur Omr, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 603 103. [Pan:Aadcr2832B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.09.2022 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant-Revenue Raised 4 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration Is As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Justified In Restricting The Addition To An Extent Of ₹.82.35 Lakhs In Respect Of Proportionate Share Of Land In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri V. Nandakumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, C.A
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

stand on the ground as the Tribunal held “the information obtained in an earlier search was third-party information which require recording of separate satisfaction note. The said information could not be utilized in proceedings under section 153 of the Act issued on the basis of search initiated in Platinum ... group of cases. No satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act is shown to have been recorded based on search conducted in the case of Om Sakthi Agencies 5 I.T.A. No.1030/Chny/24 (Madras) P. Ltd. [OSAPL]. Therefore, the assumption of jurisdiction was bad- in-law and accordingly, assessment is liable

Sarangabani Kirubakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1234/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1233/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1234/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2009- 10 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. During Hearing, Ld. Ar Raised A Pertinent Additional Ground Of Appeal To Submit That Considering The Date Of Satisfaction Note, These Assessments Are Liable To Be Quashed Being Barred By Limitation. Reliance Has Been Placed On The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jasjit Singh (155 Taxmann.Com 155). The Copy Of The Same Has Been Placed On Record. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. During hearing, Ld. AR raised a pertinent additional ground of appeal to submit that considering the date of satisfaction note, these assessments are liable to be quashed being barred by limitation. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court ... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) foiled to appreciate that the assessment order for the impugned assessment year 2009-10 is time barred. The satisfaction note was made by the Assessing Officer on 21.09.2021, which falls in Assessment Year 2022-23 and therefore the block period for issuing notice u/s 153C

Sarangabani Kribakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1233/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1233/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1234/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2009- 10 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. During Hearing, Ld. Ar Raised A Pertinent Additional Ground Of Appeal To Submit That Considering The Date Of Satisfaction Note, These Assessments Are Liable To Be Quashed Being Barred By Limitation. Reliance Has Been Placed On The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jasjit Singh (155 Taxmann.Com 155). The Copy Of The Same Has Been Placed On Record. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. During hearing, Ld. AR raised a pertinent additional ground of appeal to submit that considering the date of satisfaction note, these assessments are liable to be quashed being barred by limitation. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court ... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) foiled to appreciate that the assessment order for the impugned assessment year 2009-10 is time barred. The satisfaction note was made by the Assessing Officer on 21.09.2021, which falls in Assessment Year 2022-23 and therefore the block period for issuing notice u/s 153C