Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
HC quashed the reopening and consequential proceedings in favour of the assessee. The court found the notice issued under s.148A(b) for AY 2014-15 impermissibly relied on the return and assessment materials of a different year (AY 2013-14), so the Revenue lacked foundational information to form reasons to believe for reopening under s.147. Further, the jurisdictional officer initiated proceedings beyond the limitation prescribed by amended s.149 (effective 01.04.2021), and the show-cause notice dated 23.05.2022 did not disclose information pertinent to AY 2014-15. For these reasons the HC held the impugned notice and proceedings void and quashed them.
HC quashed the reopening and consequential proceedings in favour of the assessee. The court found the notice issued under s.148A(b) for AY 2014-15 impermissibly relied on the return and assessment materials of a different year (AY 2013-14), so the Revenue lacked foundational information to form reasons to believe for reopening under s.147. Further, the jurisdictional officer initiated proceedings beyond the limitation prescribed by amended s.149 (effective 01.04.2021), and the show-cause notice dated 23.05.2022 did not disclose information pertinent to AY 2014-15. For these reasons the HC held the impugned notice and proceedings void and quashed them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
