Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was challenged. The Assessing Officer (AO) had disallowed 20% of total sundry creditors in the regular assessment u/s 143(3). The AO sought to reopen assessment on the ground that the remaining 80% required verification. The High Court held that since the issue of sundry creditors was considered during the regular assessment, the AO cannot reopen assessment on the same issue as it would amount to a change of opinion. Further, the matter of 20% disallowance is pending before the CIT(Appeals), and the AO cannot reopen assessment on the remaining 80% due to the principle of merger. Mere audit objection cannot be the basis for reopening assessment. The petition was allowed, quashing the reopening notice u/s 148.
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was challenged. The Assessing Officer (AO) had disallowed 20% of total sundry creditors in the regular assessment u/s 143(3). The AO sought to reopen assessment on the ground that the remaining 80% required verification. The High Court held that since the issue of sundry creditors was considered during the regular assessment, the AO cannot reopen assessment on the same issue as it would amount to a change of opinion. Further, the matter of 20% disallowance is pending before the CIT(Appeals), and the AO cannot reopen assessment on the remaining 80% due to the principle of merger. Mere audit objection cannot be the basis for reopening assessment. The petition was allowed, quashing the reopening notice u/s 148.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.