https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756798 Section 153C proceedings were upheld against challenges based on limitation, jurisdiction and evidence: the Court held that satisfaction may be recorded at the time of, during, or immediately after completion of the searched person's assessment, that no separate statutory time limit exists for such recording, and that a single satisfaction note is sufficient where the same Assessing Officer acts for both persons. It also held that electronic material can be relied on in quasi-judicial tax proceedings and that Evidence Act objections, including Section 65B and denial of cross-examination, did not vitiate the assessments. By contrast, overlapping additions of the same unexplained income in the hands of two directors required reconsideration, and those assessments were remanded for fresh orders. en-us Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Aug 2024 11:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756798 Section 153C proceedings were upheld against challenges based on limitation, jurisdiction and evidence: the Court held that satisfaction may be recorded at the time of, during, or immediately after completion of the searched person's assessment, that no separate statutory time limit exists for such recording, and that a single satisfaction note is sufficient where the same Assessing Officer acts for both persons. It also held that electronic material can be relied on in quasi-judicial tax proceedings and that Evidence Act objections, including Section 65B and denial of cross-examination, did not vitiate the assessments. By contrast, overlapping additions of the same unexplained income in the hands of two directors required reconsideration, and those assessments were remanded for fresh orders. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756798