2025 (11) TMI 1471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in holding initiation of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act by the Ld. AO as valid being mandatory requirement of recording of satisfaction by AO of the appellant as envisaged u/s 153C has not been complied and therefore, the assessment is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition made of Rs. 6,00,00,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act without appreciating the fact that provision of section 69A of the Act is not applicable being the appellant is not found to be owner of said alleged amount of cash as envisaged under said section of the Act. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6,00,00,000 u/s 69A of the Act made by Ld. AO without getting valuation of said property by Government approved valuer and without making enquiry directly from the Sellers of the property about alleged cash payment even the appellant has made specific request for the same." 2. Brief facts brought to our notice by the ld AR of the assessee during the course of hearing that the alleged agreement to sell dated 13.07.2015 found during the course of search and seizure action on 20.07.2018, the above said agreements were found from the residence of Third Party Yash Pal Mendiratta, the sole premise of making addition. He further submitted that the document found during the search is a photocopy and not an original agreement. The addition on t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocument has not seen the light of the day. Further, there is no other evidence to support the veracity of the recitals made in the aforesaid alleged agreement. Therefore, under the facts of the present case, the same cannot be construed to be a sustainable ground for making addition to the income of the assessee. 18. We, thus, find that these appeals do not raise any substantial question of law. The ITAT has rightly opined that under the facts of the present cases, sustaining an addition on the basis of photocopy of alleged agreement to sell would be completely unwarranted and unjustifiable. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of, accordingly." 3. Further, Ld.AR during hearing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f PCIT v Smt. Rashmi Rajiv Mehta (supra). 7. Further, with regard to legal issue raised by the assessee, we observed that satisfaction note was issued for all the assessment years under consideration, however, as per the provisions of the Act, for initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') a separate satisfaction note is to be recorded for different assessment years instead of consolidated satisfaction note otherwise it would vitiate entire assessment proceedings as held in the case of DCIT v Sunil Kumar Sharma [2024] 165 taxmann.com 846 (SC),wherein it was held as under: "Section 153C, read with sections 132, 153 and 153A, of the Incometax Act, 1961 and seizure - Assessment of any other....