https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214062 Where the same Assessing Officer had jurisdiction over the searched person and the other person, the satisfaction contemplated by Section 158BD was not required as a file-transfer step in the usual sense, so the objection for want of recorded reasons failed. The assessment was also held not to be time-barred: the searched persons' proceedings were completed within time, notice under Section 158BD was issued soon thereafter, and the other assessee's assessment was completed within the applicable period under Section 158BE. The absence of a fixed outer limit for issuing Section 158BD notice was treated as permitting initiation within a reasonable time on these facts. en-us Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214062 Where the same Assessing Officer had jurisdiction over the searched person and the other person, the satisfaction contemplated by Section 158BD was not required as a file-transfer step in the usual sense, so the objection for want of recorded reasons failed. The assessment was also held not to be time-barred: the searched persons' proceedings were completed within time, notice under Section 158BD was issued soon thereafter, and the other assessee's assessment was completed within the applicable period under Section 158BE. The absence of a fixed outer limit for issuing Section 158BD notice was treated as permitting initiation within a reasonable time on these facts. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214062