TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 860
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arried out in respect of Batra group on 17.12.1999. During the course of search, the Revenue came across certain documents which formed the basis of a Satisfaction Note recorded under Section 158BD on 30.05.2002. Soon thereafter, notice was issued on 03.06.2002 and served on the assessee. The document forming basis of the Satisfaction Note was a receipt executed sometime in 1999. The receipt itself bore the signatures of the assessee and pertained to the transfer of terrace/roof and the ground floor of A-201, Shivalik, New Delhi. The receipt stated as follows: "That the total deal has been settled/fixed between me and purchaser at Rs. 33,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs only) and the balance payment of Rs. 16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen La....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded as follows: "6. We have considered the rival contentions. A perusal of the satisfaction note as found at pages 17 & 18 of the paper book show that the assessing authority was satisfied that the issue had required further investigation. The assessing authority has not recorded any satisfaction that the moneys specified in the receipt as found in the course of search was the undisclosed income of Shri H.P.Goel, the assessee herein. In the satisfaction note also, the assessing authority has recognized the assessee's father Shri B.L.Goel as the owner of the property as also the seller of the property. Once the Assessing Officer has recognized the existence of Shri B.L.Goel to be the owner as well as the transferor of the property and the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome belonged to the assessee herein. In the circumstances respectfully following the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari referred to (supra) as also the view expressed by the Chandigarh bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kishore Lal Balwant Rai referred to (supra) the block assessment order for the block period 01.04.1989 to 17.12.1999 passed u/s 158BD on 30.06.2004 in the case of assessee is quashed. As we have decided this appeal on the preliminary ground itself and have held that the assessment is bad in law, we are not expressing any views on the other grounds as raised in the appeal." 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue urged that given the nature of the receipt which nowhere mentioned th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... There is no dispute about the fact that the receipt was signed by the assessee which indicated that the total consideration was Rs. 33 lakhs. Even though it alluded to an agreement to sell dated 08.06.1999, the fact remains that no written agreement apparently was executed; what is a matter of fact, however, is that possession of the property was with the searched party, i.e. Batra brothers and their firm. Furthermore, the searched party had disclosed the consideration received at Rs. 4 lakh only. It is also not in dispute that the amount was in fact received by the assessee. Given these circumstances, that the Satisfaction Note, prima facie, recorded that the owner of the property was B.L.Goel (assessee's father) and that the amount was ....