Parveen Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, adjudicated an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2020–21. The Tribunal first condoned a delay of 24 days in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee’s explanation that the delay was due to lack of awareness of the appellate proceedings and the impugned order.
The dispute arose from assessment proceedings initiated under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, following a search conducted in another person’s case. During the search, cash was found and partly attributed to the assessee, leading to initiation of proceedings and an addition to the assessee’s income. The assessee challenged the validity of the proceedings, particularly on the ground that the Assessing Officer (AO) had recorded a consolidated satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years from 2014–15 to 2020–21, instead of recording separate satisfaction for each year.
The assessee contended that such a consolidated satisfaction note was contrary to law and relied on judicial precedents, including decisions of the Supreme Court, High Courts, and Tribunal, which emphasized the requirement of year-wise satisfaction based on incriminating material. The Revenue, however, argued that a consolidated satisfaction note was permissible and relied on a Delhi High Court judgment to support its position.
