IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 1 to 5 ITA 375/2017 ITA 376/2017 ITA 377/2017 ITA 378/2017 ITA 379/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 ..... Appellant versus SHEETAL INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Gaurav Khetrapal, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Sameer Rohatgi, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER % 10.07.2017 CM APPL No. 17223/2017 (for exemption) In ITA 375/2017 CM APPL No. 17224/2017 (for exemption) In ITA 376/2017 CM APPL No. 17225/2017 (for exemption) In ITA 377/2017 CM APPL No. 17226/2017 (for exemption) In ITA 378/2017 1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. ITA Nos. 375/2017, 376/2017, 377/2017, 378/2017 & 379/2017 2. These appeals by Revenue under Section 260-A of Income Tax ITA Nos. 375, 376, 377, 378, 379/2017 Page 1 of 4 Act, 1961 ( Act ) are directed against common order dated 28th October, 2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) in ITA Nos. 569, 570, 651, 652 and 929/Del/2013 for Assessment Years ( AYs ) 2004-05, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2007-08 respectively. 3. Admit. following question is framed for consideration: Whether ITAT was right in law in holding that proceedings under Section 153-C of Income Tax Act, 1961 were not validly initiated? 4. With consent of learned counsel for parties, appeals are taken up for final hearing. 5. From impugned order dated 28th October 2016, it is seen that short ground on which it was held by ITAT that proceeding was not validly initiated under Section 153C of Act since there was no satisfaction note recorded by Assessing Officer ( AO ) of searched person 6. In present case, AO of searched person and other person (the Assessee) was same. In similar circumstances, Court has recently in decision dated 25th May, 2017 in WP (C) No. 525 of 2015 (Ganpati Fincap Services Pvt Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax) held, inter alia, as under: (iv) Where AO of searched person and other person is same, such satisfaction note qua other person has to be recorded by AO of searched person prior to initiation of proceedings against other person. This is sine die non for ITA Nos. 375, 376, 377, 378, 379/2017 Page 2 of 4 triggering proceedings against other person under Section 153C of Act. (v) There do not have to be two separate satisfaction notes prepared by AO of searched person even where he is also AO of other person. In such event, AO need make only one satisfaction note. That satisfaction note is qua other person. Further, it is sufficient that such satisfaction note is placed in file of other person by AO in his capacity as AO of such other person. 7. In that view of matter, impugned order of ITAT which proceeds to invalidate proceedings under Section 153C of Act only for reason that AO of searched who was also that of Assessee, did not record separate satisfaction note cannot be sustained in law. 8. question framed is, accordingly, answered in negative i.e., in favour of Revenue and against Assessee. impugned order of ITAT is hereby set aside. 9. Learned counsel for Assessee, however, urges that this is case where there were no incriminating materials available to proceed against Assessee under Section 153C of Act. 10. above issue has not been examined on merits by ITAT. In circumstances, Court considers it appropriate to direct that, for above purpose, aforementioned appeals shall stand restored to file of ITAT and ITAT will hear them on merits. 11. appeals aforementioned will now be listed before ITAT on 4th September, 2017. ITAT is requested to endeavour to dispose them of on merits within period of six months thereafter. ITA Nos. 375, 376, 377, 378, 379/2017 Page 3 of 4 12. appeals are disposed of in above terms. S.MURALIDHAR, J PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J JULY 10, 2017 Rm ITA Nos. 375, 376, 377, 378, 379/2017 Page 4 of 4 Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-3 v. Sheetal International Pvt. Ltd