Jurisdictional precondition for VAT search notices requires pending proceedings and recorded satisfaction; absent both, notices fail.

Section 34(8A) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could be invoked only during pending proceedings, and the prescribed authority had to record satisfaction that tax had been evaded or incorrectly disclosed on the basis of search material. Because no proceedings were pending when the notices were issued and the notices did not record the required satisfaction, the notices lacked jurisdiction and were liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether notices issued under section 34(8A) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were valid in the absence of pending proceedings and recorded satisfaction.

Analysis: Section 34(8A) could be invoked only during the course of pending proceedings under the Act, and the prescribed authority had to be satisfied that tax had been evaded or incorrectly disclosed. The existence of pending proceedings was thus a jurisdictional precondition for exercise of the power. On the admitted facts, no proceedings were pending against the petitioner when the impugned notices were issued, and the notices did not record the requisite satisfaction on the basis of material found in the search.

Conclusion: The notices were without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

---