2017 (3) TMI 89 - HC - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153C - non recording of satisfaction - Held that - It is not disputed that the search was carried out at the premises and in the case of one another person, Shri Vikas R. Patel. There was no satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer in the case of the searched person, Shri Vikas R. Patel before initiating Section 153 proceedings, and therefore, the mandatory requirement, before initiating the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act in the case of the assessee (other than the searched person) has not bee followed. It was the case on behalf of the revenue that separate satisfaction note was recorded by the Assessing Officer. However, as per catena of decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, same is not sufficient to initiate the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act in the case of the assessee (other than the searched person). CBDT has also issued Circular No.24/2015 dated 31/12/2015 in which it is observed that recording of satisfaction note is prerequisite and the satisfaction note must be prepared by the AO before he transmits the record to the other AO who has jurisdiction over such other person. - Decided in favour of assessee

Issues:
1. Common question of law and facts arising in Tax Appeals for different Assessment Years.
2. Validity of proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
3. Requirement of separate satisfaction note before initiating proceedings under Section 153C.
4. Interpretation of relevant legal precedents and Circular No.24/2015 issued by CBDT.

Analysis:
1. The High Court heard Tax Appeals related to the same assessee but for different Assessment Years, arising from a common judgment by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
2. The Appeals challenged the validity of proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act based on a search and seizure action conducted at the premises of a person named Vikas R. Patel.
3. The Assessing Officer had issued notices under Section 153C for the Assessment Years in question, but the Appeals contended that there was no separate satisfaction recorded in the case of Vikas R. Patel before initiating the proceedings, as required by law.
4. Relying on legal precedents such as decisions of the Supreme Court and the Gujarat High Court, the High Court found that the absence of separate satisfaction note in the case of the searched person rendered the proceedings under Section 153C invalid.
5. The High Court also noted the Circular No.24/2015 issued by the CBDT emphasizing the importance of recording satisfaction notes before transmitting records to another Assessing Officer.
6. Despite the Department's Appeals, the High Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the case, leading to the dismissal of the Appeals.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the key issues raised in the Tax Appeals, focusing on the validity of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act and the requirement of a separate satisfaction note before initiating such proceedings. The High Court's decision was based on legal precedents and the Circular issued by the CBDT, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the Appeals.

← Previous Next →