2018 (5) TMI 1027

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f S.151(2) of the Income Tax Act are complied with when actual satisfaction was taken of Commissioner only? (2)Whether on facts and in law, the additional commissioner is said as satisfied on the reasons recorded when after signing approval sheet as satisfied, he forwarded it for approval of higher authority? (3) Whether on facts and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that provisions of S.151(2) are complied with when Assessing Officer has sent form for approval of Commissioner only which was routed through Addl. Commissioner? 4. Whether on facts and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in not following its own decisions? 5. Whether on facts and in law, the Income ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....properly and found that conditions of subsection( 2) of section 151 are satisfied. 6. The approval is granted in printed proforma which contains as many as 13 entries. Entries no. 1 to 11 referred to relevant informations concerning the case on hand, such as, income of the assessee, his PAN number, order of assessment in question, etc.. Entry no.11 pertains to reasons for the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Entry no.12 reads as under : "Whether the Addl. Commissioner is satisfied on the reasons recorded by the AO that it is a fit case for the issue of notice u/s.148" In response to this question, the Joint Commissioner had made the following remarks in his own handwriting : ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Joint Commissioner. He in clear terms, expressed his satisfaction that on the basis of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, it was a fit case for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Merely because the papers were thereafter for some erroneous reason also placed before the Commissioner who also recorded his similar satisfaction would not take away anything from the previous conclusion. 11. In case of Anirudhsinhji Karansinhji Jadeja (supra), the sanction to be granted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 had to be done by the D.S.P. Instead of exercising such powers, he made a report to the Additional Chief Secretary and asked his permission to proceed under the TADA Act. This was....