TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 468
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 4,19,306/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that, during the course of search, a copy of the sale deed No.6268/08 dated 25.07.2008 was found and seized as per pages 174 to 197 of Annexure-A/MBSPL/PJT/PO-1/04 relating to sale of land admeasuring Ac.05-04 guntas, part of Sy. No. 172 of Hydernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District by the assessee in favour of Dr. P.S. Prasad for a total consideration of Rs. 10 lakhs, whereas, the fair market value of the property as per the Registration Authority for levying stamp duty was at Rs. 16,29,14,400/-. Further, as seen from the return of income filed by the assessee, she has not offered to tax capital gain arising out of the said sale of property. Therefore, the Assessing Officer called-upon the assessee to explain as to why the capital gain arising out of sale of property shall not be computed. In response, the assessee submitted that the impugned property has been assigned to her in the year 1995 through the Court Decree C.S.No.14/1958 as per the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad for a consideration of Rs. 3,60,000/-. The above property....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is null and void. The learned CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also by following the decision of ITAT in the group cases pertaining to various persons including Mrs. L. Reena Peterson, releated-search party in the case of M/s. MBS Jewellers in ITA.Nos.1082 to 1087/Hyd./2014 and ITA.Nos.1211 to 1218/Hyd./2014, quashed the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the satisfaction which was drawn to initiate the proceedings u/sec.153C merely records that the documents pertaining the appellant has been seized, but, nothing incriminating has been recorded in the satisfaction regarding those documents. The order sheet noting in the case of the appellant is more or less identical to material terms to that of Mrs. L. Reena Peterson and, therefore, following the order of the ITAT (supra) held that notice issued u/sec.153C has not been issued in a proper manner and procedure, thus, renders it invalid and, therefore, the consequent assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153C was also quashed. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the Rev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....satisfaction qua each assessment year in light of material found during the course of search and thus, the Assessing Officer ought to have record satisfaction note on the basis of material found during the course of search which belonged/pertains to the other person and had a bearing on the total income of particular assessment year. In the present case, going by the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer merely stated that the documents relating to the assessee-respondent, but has not arrived at a correct satisfaction that the said document had a bearing on the total income of the assessee. Therefore, in absence of proper satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer, the issue of notice u/sec.153C and consequent assessment order is in valid and liable to be quashed. The learned CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly quashed the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. 6.1. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee, further relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Malls (P.) Ltd., vs., PCIT-8, New Delhi (supra), submitted that, there is no dispute with regard to the ratio laid down by the Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the searched person and the Assessing Officer of the assessee are one and the same. The Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction note in the case of the assessee as 'other person' and observed that, documents found during the course of search on 11.03.2010 relates to Smt. Shakila Baig-Assessee. The provisions of sec.153C deals with assessment of 'other person'. As per the provisions of sec.153C of the Act stood before 01.10.2014, where a search had been taken place and the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A. In otherwords, during....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....situation, the satisfaction note would be qua the other person. The second requirement of transmitting the document so seized from the searched person would not be there as he himself will be the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the other person and, therefore, there is no question of transmitting such seized documents to himself. 9. In the present case, going by the facts available on record, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that, during the course of search on 11.03.2010 in the case of M/s. MBS Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., and it's group cases, a document was found and seized which contain copy of the sale deed no.6268/2008 dated 25.07.2008 for sale of land admeasuring ac.5.04 gts in Sy.no.172 of Hydernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of Dr. P.S. Prasad and the said document belongs to the assessee and having a bearing on the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 2009-2010. Therefore, in our considered view, the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer is in accordance with the provisions of sec.153C of the Act and consequently, notice issued u/sec.153C is valid and, therefore, in our considered view, the learned CIT(A) erred....