TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1133
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions with liberty to the assessee to file fresh. The reason for such dismissal of the application was that the applications were running into 50 pages; and apart from these MAs., the assessee had filed paper book containing 26 decisions running into 300 pages. The Tribunal was of the view that for explaining apparent error in an order running into 15 pages, the assessee has devoted 50 pages in the application. This shows that these applications are vague and misleading. Therefore, these applications were dismissed with liberty to file fresh. Accordingly, the assessee has filed fresh MAs. In brief, the grievance of the assessee is that the assessment orders in this case have been passed under section 153C of the Act. For taking cognizance under section 153C it is mandatory that the AO of the searched person should record a satisfaction note exhibiting fact that during the course of search certain documents belonged to other persons were found and perusal of these documents would indicate that taxable income of the assessee has escaped assessment. After this satisfaction note, he would transmit record along with these documents to the AO who has jurisdiction over such other persons.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terim order: "06.12.2019 Present : Shri Nimesh Vayawala, AR Shri L.J. Jain, Sr.DR The ld.DR has filed an application for adjournment stating therein that information called for vide order dated 4.10.2019 is yet to be received from the Assessing Officer. 2. The ld.counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, raised objection on the adjournment, and submitted that these MAs. were filed way back in 2016. The department has been seeking adjournment time and again. The Department was directed to produce satisfaction note, if any, recorded in the case of searched person for taking action against the present assessee under section 153C of the Act as well as any material belonged to the assessee as stated found at the premises of the assessee. The order sheet dated 4.10.2019 reads as under: "04.10.2019 Present assessee by: Shri Nimesh Vayawala, AR Revenue by: Shri Jamesh Kurian, Sr.DR The learned Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, submitted that while upholding taking cognizance under Section 153C at the end of the Assessing Officer, the Tribunal has observed that where the Assessing Officer is common for the searched person and any other person, then no separate s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....copy of reasons dated 11.10.2004 along with letter dated 14.1.2020. A categorical statement was made by the AO as well as of the ld.DR that no satisfaction note was recorded and available in the record of searched persons. We also deem it appropriate to take note of the finding of the Tribunal in the order dated 17.4.2013 on this respect. It reads as under: " ....... Further, he relied upon the case of ACIT, Circle-1, Gwalior vs. M/s Global Estate In ITA Nos. 144 to 149/Agra/2011 for A.Y. 2003-04 to 2008-09, order dated 30.11.2012, wherein the issue was no satisfaction recorded by the A.O. of the search party. Again, he further relied upon in case of Akil Gulamali somji vs. ITO, Pune [2012] 20 taxmann.com 380 (Pune), wherein the issue of prior approval of ACIT/ JCIT is required to pass the order u/s.153C r.w.s. 153A of the IT Act. The assessee further relied upon following cases: i). CIT vs. M/s Gambhir Silk Mills in Tax Appeal No. 1493 of 2010 - wherein assessment proceeding u/s. 153C was completed and documents not written by the assessee. Held, proceeding invalid. ii. CIT vs. Meghmani Organics Limited in Tax Appeal Nos. 2077, 2078 to 2086 of 2009 - wherein documents not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....person is required to be found and seized at the premises of the search took place where assessment u/s. 153A has been made i.e. searched party. For initiating proceeding u/s.153C, it is not necessary that these books of account should be incriminating. When books of account of the appellant found and seized from the search place of the partner of the firm, the A.O. is fully empowered to initiate proceeding u/s. 153C of the IT Act against the firm i.e. other person. The A.O. of the both partners as well as firm was same. Therefore, no separate satisfaction is required to be recorded as held in case of CIT vs. Panchajanyam Management Agencies & Services [2011] 333 ITR 281 (Ker.), wherein it was held that search in premises of the managing partner - same A.O. having jurisdiction over managing partner and firm - notice to firm u/s.158 BD r.w.s. 158BC, the A.O. need not to record reasons - block assessment of firm is valid. The case laws cited by the appellant are squarely not applicable as in case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. vs. DCIT (supra), already scrutiny assessment has been made and no incriminating documents were found during the course of search. Therefore, proceeding ....