TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (9) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') are directed against the common order dated 30th November, 2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') Delhi Bench "A", New Delhi in I.T.A. No. 3673 and 3674/Del/01 for the Assessment Years 1995-96 and 1996-97 respectively. 2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue questioning the order dated 21st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is ground and upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. The Tribunal considered the case on merits and found that for both the assessment years, the Assessing Officer had disallowed certain claims and made certain additions. It found that the Revenue had been unable to demonstrate that the Assessee had concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....satisfaction is not recorded in specific terms but is otherwise discernible from order passed by the authority?" 6. She accordingly urged that this Court should await the decision of the Larger Bench. 7. Assuming the Revenue were to succeed before the larger Bench, and the question referred to it is answered in the affirmative, it would mean that it is sufficient that the satisfaction of the Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(c) of the Act is discernible therefrom. 8. At the foot of the assessment orders, the Assessing Officer had observed: "Issue necessary forms. Penalty proceedings 271 (1)(c) have been initiated separately." 9. The above recording does not satisfy the requirement of Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act as explained by this Court in Ram Commercial Enterprises Limited. Further even on a detailed perusal ....