S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

1. Admit.

2. Issue notice.

3. The following question of law arises for consideration :-

“Did the ITAT fall into error in holding that the satisfaction recorded under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not in compliance with the provisions of the Act and furthermore that the material discovered during the search in the circumstances of the case did not belong to the assesse/respondent.”

4. Ms. Monika Ghai, Advocate accepts notice of appeal.

With consent of counsel for the parties, appeals were heard finally.

5. The facts of the case are that the assessee provides Business Auxiliary services and also earns income by way of commissions/brokerage. It had declared over Rs. 1.85 crores in its return of income dated 30.09.2008. One of its Directors, i.e., Jatinder Pal Singh was subjected to search proceedings on 22.04.2010. In the course of the search, cash worth Rs. 2 crores was seized. In his residential premises over Rs. 15.74 lakhs was found of which Rs. 15 lakhs was seized by the department; out of this a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs belonged to the company.

6. In the course of the search, Jatinder Pal Singh, the party who was eventually issued notice under Se