Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the issuance of a notice under s.148A(b) did not furnish a basis to reopen assessment where the reasons relied upon had already been considered by the AO in the original assessment order; an AO lacks jurisdiction to effectively review or revisit his concluded assessment by invoking reassessment proceedings under s.148 to reappreciate documents and explanations already placed on record. The Court emphasized that reassessment under s.148 cannot be used as a surrogate for review and that the power to re-examine completed assessments is not to be exercised intermittently. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner were quashed.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the issuance of a notice under s.148A(b) did not furnish a basis to reopen assessment where the reasons relied upon had already been considered by the AO in the original assessment order; an AO lacks jurisdiction to effectively review or revisit his concluded assessment by invoking reassessment proceedings under s.148 to reappreciate documents and explanations already placed on record. The Court emphasized that reassessment under s.148 cannot be used as a surrogate for review and that the power to re-examine completed assessments is not to be exercised intermittently. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.