2023 (11) TMI 809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned in the above-captioned appeals preferred by the appellant/revenue is the order dated 24.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, "Tribunal"]. This order is assailed in the six appeals filed by the appellant/revenue. 2. Via the impugned order, the Tribunal has thus disposed of the cross-appeals filed by the appellant/revenue and the respondents/assessees. 3. The record shows that on 13.08.2018, the above-captioned appeals were admitted and a common question of law was framed which reads as follows: "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent/assessee as initiation of proceedings under 153 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was bad and contrary to law?" 4. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... AO in the proceedings relating to the assessee i.e. M/s Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd. and not in the case of Sh. Pramod Goel in whose case search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was undertaken on 14.09.2010. Therefore, the jurisdiction assumed by the AO without recording the satisfaction in the case of the searched person was not valid. xxx xxx xxx 17. From the plain reading of the aforesaid Circular No. 24/2015 dated even if the AO of the searched person, and of the other person is one and the same then he is required to record his satisfaction in the case of searched person. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the AO of the searched person has not recorded any satisfaction rather the satisfaction is recorded ....