Assessee is a co-operative Bank providing financial and banking services. Assessing Officer on basis of search conducted against third person, issued notice under section 148 to assessee, claiming that it had reason to believe that assessee’s income chargeable to tax for relevant assessment year had escaped assessment. The Assessee requested for satisfaction note and also copy of statement recorded of the parties. The Assessing Officer passed the order without providing the satisfaction note and copy of the statement. On writ allowing the petition the Court held that the Assessing Officer was duty bound to issue, along with notice under section 148, reasons which formed basis for reopening of assessment, satisfaction note and order of Principal Commissioner, who granted approval to issuance of said notice along with note of Assessing Officer in support of his request for approval, appraisal report from DDIT (Inv) Bhavnagar, and statements of person recorded under section 131 which were referred to in notice. However, none of these documents, were sent to assessee in compliance with general directions issued by Court. It was also borne from record that despite several requests from assessee, specifically demanding a copy of all these documents, Assessing Officer had refused to furnish copies of same to assessee – Thereafter, Assessing Officer rejected request of assessee for furnishing all these documents without assigning any reasons for such rejection, nor dealing with specific objections and request made by assessee in its order. Accordingly the order was set aside and Whether therefore, matter was remanded back for adjudication afresh. Followed Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT(2022) 137 taxmann.com 315/ 287 Taxman 1/ 443 ITR 127 ( Bom)( HC), Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2018) 99 taxmann.com 409/ (2017) 398 ITR 198 (Delhi)(HC). (AY. 2013-14)