Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 401 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment u/s 153C - Non recording of valid satisfaction - HELD THAT:- As statutory provision i.e. sec. 153C [as on the date of search on 11.3.2010] as well as the satisfaction note dated 11.11.2011 and the corresponding material; found or seized during the course of search is "belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in sec.153A", whereas the Assessing Officer's satisfaction note herein had only recorded that the same "relates to" Sri Goruganti Damodar Rao" (the assessee). We make it clear that the legislative amendment vide the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 1.6.2000 only stipulate that the impugned statutory provision comes into play even in case the specified material; found or seized "during the search" also "pertain or pertains to" or relates to". The Assessing Officer hereinabove clearly fell into error in not arriving at the impugned satisfaction in the prescribed manner therefore. CIT-DR's next vehement contention during the course of hearing is that all the foregoing statutory expressions carry one and the same implication, although the grammatical expression employed herein may vary from case to case not acceptable as in light of judgment in CWT vs. B. Chatterjee [1976 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] and Late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan [1986 (10) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] that the clinching expression "belongs" carries the rightful sense of ownership. We therefore adopt stricter interpretation as per the Commissioner of Customs vs. Dilip Kumar & Co [2018 (7) TMI 1826 - SUPREME COURT] and hold that as the Assessing Officer's impugned assessment is not based on a valid satisfaction note and therefore, the CIT(A)'s order quashing the same deserves to be upheld. - Decided against revenue.
|