Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Appellate Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not satisfy the condition precedent before issuing a notice u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act against the appellant, who was a third party not subjected to search. The satisfaction note prepared by the AO did not meet the legal requirements as the seized material did not pertain to or contain anything incriminating against the appellant. Consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17 was held to be bad in law, rendering the consequent assessment orders null and void. Regarding additions made in the unabated assessment years, the Tribunal relied on Supreme Court decisions to hold that in unabated assessments u/s 153C, additions are permissible only if based on incriminating material found during the search. Since no such material existed against the appellant, the additions made u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) were directed to be deleted for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.