TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1626
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Counsel for the assessee field submissions on 11.10.2023 and on 28.11.2023. As the assessee objected to the legality of assessment order passed on the issue of satisfaction note, therefore, on 28.11.2023, when the ld. AR appeared and filed submissions to Ld. CIT(A), he took the submissions and stated that the appeal would be listed again after going through the submissions filed. However, when the assessee visited ITBA portal on 16.03.2024, it was found that the order was passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and uploaded on the e-filing portal of the assessee. Due to this bonafide impression, the assessee was waiting for the notice of further hearing and was under impression that no order was passed. Due to this reason, the appeal was got delayed by 60 days in filing the same. No soon order was taken from ITBA portal, an appeal was filed before the Tribunal. The ld. AR thus, prayed for the condonation of delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT-DR submits that the reasons given by the assessee is not supported by any evidence, therefore, he requested for the dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay. 4. Heard both the parties. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Officer of the assessee wherein the documents found and seized during the course of search on 18.04.2017 were stated. Besides this certain documents found and seized during the course of survey carried out on 08.09.2015 were also referred. The assessee objected the same, however, the AO after considering the submissions of the assessee on the legal as well as merits of the issues completed the assessment u/s 153 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2019 wherein the addition of Rs. 2,43,78,000/- were made based on the loose papers found and seized during the course of search as well as during the course of survey. 8. Against the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 29.11.2023 has upheld the orders of Ld. AO, thus, aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred the appeal before the Tribunal wherein following grounds are taken by the assessee: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the proceedings u/s.153-C of the Act to be validly initiated in the subject case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cument found and seized from the possession of Sharma Group based on which proceedings u/s 153C were initiated in the hands of the assessee. As per these papers, it is alleged by the Revenue that assessee had received various mounts in cash on various dates from Sh. Ashrey Sharma (General Manager in Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam) in whose case search operation was conducted on 18.04.2017. The Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 41 to 43 wherein the assessee's in terms of letter dated 12.11.2019 and 16.11.2019 requested for supply of the copies of the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee by the AO of the assessee and also of the Assessing Officer of the person searched wherein he had satisfied that the document seized from the possession of the persons searched belonged to the assessee. He further submits that a request was made to supply the satisfaction note of the AO of person searched before initiating proceedings u/s 153C in the hands of assessee. 10. Ld. AR pointed out that in the copy of satisfaction note dated 19.08.2019 recorded by the Assessing Officer of the assessee i.e. the DCIT, Central Circle, Dehradun, certain papers were referred as found an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of assessee deserves to be held bad in law. 13. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT-DR supports the orders of the lower authorities and submits that satisfaction note of the AO of the persons searched was prepared and must be available in the file of that person searched, and therefore, the same could not be available in the file of the assessee. All the details with respect to which the satisfaction was recoded including the copies of the relevant material was provided to the assessee and, therefore, assessee's contention that such action of AO is to be held as ingenuine is not correct. Further, Ld. CIT-DR submits that the documents found during the course of survey was pertaining to the year under appeal and, therefore, the same were considered for making additions and there is no error in the order of AO with respect to the entries found recorded in these papers and, therefore, the AO has rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 153C in the case of assessee. He prayed accordingly. 14. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, according to the Ld. AR, the due and prescribed procedure to initiate proceedings u/s 153C has not followed.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DT. 4. The guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as referred to in para 2 above, with regard to recording of satisfaction note, may be brought to the notice of all for strict compliance. It is further clarified that even if the AO of the searched person and the "other person" is one and the same, then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts. 5. In view of the above, filing of appeals on the issue of recording of satisfaction note should also be decided in the light of the above judgement. Accordingly, the Board hereby directs that pending litigation with regard to recording of satisfaction note under section 158BD/153C should be withdrawn/not pressed if it does not meet the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court. 15. From the perusal of the above CBDT circular, it is evident that the provisions of section 153C are substantially similar/pari-materia to the provisions of section 158BD and therefore, the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court should be applied to the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act for the purposes of assessing the income of person other than the person searched. 16. In the instant case, the sole bas....