Unverified Insight Portal Information Cannot Justify Reassessment Without a Verified Taxpayer-Specific Income-Escape Nexus or Demonstrated Application...
Assessing Officer jurisdiction after statutory transfer invalidates reassessment notices issued by transferor officers and nullifies resulting proceed...
Consequential appeal-effect orders must implement rectification deleting working-capital adjustments and reconsider the resulting arm's-length range c...
Discounted cash flow valuation protects share premium where projections are reasonable, while audited book expenses defeat unexplained-expenditure add...
Section 54 construction relief survives pre-transfer commencement when completion occurs within the statutory period, excluding ineligible spouse-owne...
The assessment years beyond six years but not exceeding ten years can be reopened u/s 153A only if the Assessing Officer possesses evidence depicting escapement of income aggregating Rs.50,00,000/- or more in such relevant assessment years. These provisions extending the assessment period beyond six years up to ten years impose a stringent condition of the Assessing Officer possessing evidence of escapement of income of Rs.50,00,000/- or more. Such provisions must be construed strictly, and the evidence relied upon by the Assessing Officer in such extended period assessments must be tangible. The Departmental Valuation Officer's report on a standalone basis without corroborating material cannot be construed as incriminating material, and additions solely based on the Departmental Valuation Officer's report are unsustainable. In the assessee's case, no difference was found between the investment disclosed in the books of account and the Departmental Valuation Officer's report for the property. Since the evidence relating to undisclosed investments in the "relevant assessment years" was less than Rs.50,00,000/-, the reopening of the assessment for the "relevant years" was invalid and quashed. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
The assessment years beyond six years but not exceeding ten years can be reopened u/s 153A only if the Assessing Officer possesses evidence depicting escapement of income aggregating Rs.50,00,000/- or more in such relevant assessment years. These provisions extending the assessment period beyond six years up to ten years impose a stringent condition of the Assessing Officer possessing evidence of escapement of income of Rs.50,00,000/- or more. Such provisions must be construed strictly, and the evidence relied upon by the Assessing Officer in such extended period assessments must be tangible. The Departmental Valuation Officer's report on a standalone basis without corroborating material cannot be construed as incriminating material, and additions solely based on the Departmental Valuation Officer's report are unsustainable. In the assessee's case, no difference was found between the investment disclosed in the books of account and the Departmental Valuation Officer's report for the property. Since the evidence relating to undisclosed investments in the "relevant assessment years" was less than Rs.50,00,000/-, the reopening of the assessment for the "relevant years" was invalid and quashed. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4884 
