Commissioner of Income-tax, Central III, Chennai v. J.S.Kamath
[Citation -2020-LL-0706-31]

Citation 2020-LL-0706-31
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax, Central III, Chennai
Respondent Name J.S.Kamath
Court HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 06/07/2020
Assessment Year 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02, 01/04/2002-26/11/2002
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags substantial question of law • recording of satisfaction • satisfaction note • searched person
Bot Summary: 7/Mds/2008 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the block assessment period from 01.4.1996 to 26.11.2002. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are directed against the common order dated 26.6.2009 made respectively in IT(SS)A.No. 30/ Mds/2008 in IT(SS)A. No.7/Mds/2008 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the block period 01.4.1996 to 26.11.2002. These appeals cannot be pursued by the Revenue in the light of the Board's circular in Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2015. In the said circular, it has been stated that the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Calcutta Knitwears Civil Appeal No.3958 of 2014 dated 12.3.2014 with regard to recording any satisfaction note were brought to the notice of all for strict compliance and it has been clarified that even if the Assessing Officer 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. The above circular fully covers the issue raised in the case on hand and the appeals have to be dismissed. In the light of the above, the tax case appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the substantial question of law framed is left open.


TCA.Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 In High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 06.7.2020 Coram : Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central III, Chennai ...Appellant Vs Mr.J.S.Kamath ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against common order dated 26.6.2009 made respectively in IT(SS)A.No.7/Mds/ 2008 and C.O.No.30/Mds/2008 in IT(SS)A.No.7/Mds/2008 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for block assessment period from 01.4.1996 to 26.11.2002. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent: Mr.A.S.Sriraman COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 appellant Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing for respondent. 2. These appeals, filed by Revenue under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act) are directed against common order dated 26.6.2009 made respectively in IT(SS)A.No.7/Mds/2008 and C.O.No.30/ Mds/2008 in IT(SS)A. No.7/Mds/2008 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench (for brevity, Tribunal) for block period 01.4.1996 to 26.11.2002. 3. appeals have been admitted on 22.3.2010 on following substantial question of law : Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that assessment made on assessee for block period under Section 158BD was void ab initio and in quashing assessment on ground which no satisfaction note has been recorded by concerned Assessing Officer to effect that income belonged to another person namely assessee? 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 4. These appeals cannot be pursued by Revenue in light of Board's circular in Circular No.24/2015 dated 31.12.2015. In said circular, it has been stated that guidelines of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of M/s.Calcutta Knitwears [Civil Appeal No.3958 of 2014 dated 12.3.2014] with regard to recording any satisfaction note were brought to notice of all for strict compliance and it has been clarified that even if Assessing Officer of searched person and 'other person' is one and same, then also, he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by Courts. Therefore, it has also been clarified that filing of appeals on issue of recording of satisfaction note should also be decided in light of said judgment. Taking note of said decision, Board directed that pending litigation with regard to recording of satisfaction note under Section 158BD/153C of Act should be withdrawn/not pressed if it does not meet guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court. above circular fully covers issue raised in case on hand and appeals have to be dismissed. 5. In light of above, tax case appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed and substantial question of law framed is left open. No costs. 06.7.2020 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS To Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. TCA.Nos.256 & 257 of 2010 06.7.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Central III, Chennai v. J.S.Kamath
Report Error