Rajendra Rameshlal Gugale Vs PCIT (ITAT Pune)
ITAT Pune held that satisfaction note is required to be recorded u/s.153C for each assessment year, thus, recording of consolidated satisfaction note for different assessment years (AY) would vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. Accordingly, the order is liable to be quashed.
Facts- The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of land development and real estate He filed his return of income on 28.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.8,08,880/-. A search action u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in Yuvraj Dhamale Group of cases on 26.09.2017. During the search certain documents pertaining to Shri Rajendra Ramesh Gugale were found and seized.
The case was centralized u/sec.127 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Thereafter, by recording a satisfaction dated 01.03.2021 as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act in the case of the present assessee, notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued for assessment years 2012-2013 to 2018-2019 on 27.05.2021. AO completed the assessment u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153C of the Act on 26.12.2021 accepting the returned income.
Thereafter, PCIT observed that assessee has taken unsecured loan in cash through Shri Sachin Nahar of Rs.1,56,00,000/- against which he had paid interest of Rs.18,64,800/- in cash. Therefore, by accepting cash loan of Rs.1,56,00,000/- the assessee had violated the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. Further, the source of interest paid in cash of Rs.18,64,800/- was also not examined by AO in view of the provisions of section 69C of the Act. Thus, PCIT invoked provisions of section 263 and set aside the order of AO and directed fresh assessment. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
