<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (8) TMI 172 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262255</link>
    <description>The Tribunal quashed the notices issued under Section 153C and the consequential assessment orders for all the assessment years involved due to the lack of proper satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer of the person searched, rendering the proceedings void ab initio. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of two separate satisfaction notes and held that the satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer of the assessee could not substitute the requirement of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer of the person searched. Consequently, all other grounds raised by the assessee were not separately adjudicated as the primary jurisdictional issue invalidated the assessment proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 06:44:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 172 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262255</link>
      <description>The Tribunal quashed the notices issued under Section 153C and the consequential assessment orders for all the assessment years involved due to the lack of proper satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer of the person searched, rendering the proceedings void ab initio. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of two separate satisfaction notes and held that the satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer of the assessee could not substitute the requirement of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer of the person searched. Consequently, all other grounds raised by the assessee were not separately adjudicated as the primary jurisdictional issue invalidated the assessment proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>