TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LE Mr. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA) 1. At the outset, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani has submitted that the present writ petition is required to be allowed in terms of the judgment dated 18.11.2025 passed in the case of Parag Rameshbhai Gathani v. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation reported in [2025] 180 taxmann.com 662 (Gujarat). It is further submitted that the assessee in that case was the co-owner of the same land which is the subject matter of this petition, and the petitioner is the sister-in-law of the assessees- Parag Rameshbhai Gathani and the wife of the present petitioner in whose favour the reassessment has been quashed and set aside by the said judgment dated 18.11.2025. 2. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Hemani, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on under Section 132 of the Act, which was conducted in the case of Suresh R. Thkkar, which is a third party, on 15.10.2019. 5. The facts of Parag Rameshbhai Gathani (supra), as incorporated in the judgment and order dated 18.11.2025 suggest that he was also subjected to the proceedings of reassessment, on the basis of the search action conducted on 15.10.2019 in the case of the very same person, i.e. Suresh R. Thakkar. In the said case, the assessment was framed in the case of the search person in August 2021, which is identical to the present petitioner. However, the satisfaction note was recorded by the Assessing Officer of the search person on 06.06.2023, whereas, in the present case, the satisfaction note has been recorded on 27.01.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) along with the assessment proceedings under Section 158BC of the Act; and (c) immediately after the assessment proceedings are completed under Section 158BC of the Act of the searched person." 16. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, the respondent-department issued Circular No.24/2015 in light of the provisions of Section 153C of the Act clarifying the recording of the satisfaction note at three stages. The said Circular is incorporated as under: "CIRCULAR NO.24 of 2015 [F.NO.279/MISC./ 140/ 2015 /ITJ] Section 153C, READ WITH SECTION 158BD OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE - ASSESSMENT OF INCOME IN CASE OF OTHER PERSON - RECORDING OF SATISFACTION NOTE UNDER SECTION 158BD/153C O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n accepted by CBDT. 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 judgment. Accordingly, the Board hereby directs that pending litigation with regard to recording of satisfaction note under section 158BD 1153C should be withdrawn/not pressed if it does no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r to the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Jitendra H. Modi (supra), wherein this Court, by placing reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra), has held that satisfaction recorded after 09 months could not be said to be immediate action and hence, the Coordinate Bench of this Court set aside the notices issued under Section 158BD of the Act. In the instant case, there has been a delay of 22 months in recording the satisfaction, which runs contrary to the decision in Calcutta Knitwears (supra) as well as provision '(c)' of Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2015, which uses the expression "immediately after the assessment procedure is completed". 19. Twin reasons ....