Held that no mandate for the Pr. CIT to record his own reasons for approval or satisfaction, It would be sufficed that the Pr. CIT recorded the satisfaction regarding the reasons recorded by the AO.–Notice for reopening is valid.(AY. 2013-14)
Venky Steels (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 301 Taxman 344 / (2025) 475 ITR 111 (Patna)(HC)/Editorial : Venky Steels (P.) Ltd v.CIT (2025] 304 Taxman 597 475 ITR 148 (SC)
S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice –Recording of satisfaction-No mandate for the Pr. CIT to record his own reasons for approval or satisfaction-It would be sufficed that the Pr. CIT recorded the satisfaction regarding the reasons recorded by the AO-Writ petition is dismissed.[S. 148, Art.226]