Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Reassessment initiated beyond four years from the end of the...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfaction
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Reassessment initiated beyond four years from the end of the relevant AY was held invalid because the recorded reasons did not allege, as required by the proviso to s.147, any failure by the taxpayer to fully and truly disclose material facts, hence jurisdiction to reopen was absent and the notice was quashed. The reopening was also vitiated as it was based merely on investigation-wing information without any independent enquiry or live link demonstrating the AO's own "reason to believe," rendering it a case of borrowed satisfaction, so the consequent proceedings could not stand. Further, failure to dispose objections by a speaking order made the consequent assessment a nullity; therefore, the s.148 notice and reassessment were set aside and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Reassessment initiated beyond four years from the end of the relevant AY was held invalid because the recorded reasons did not allege, as required by the proviso to s.147, any failure by the taxpayer to fully and truly disclose material facts, hence jurisdiction to reopen was absent and the notice was quashed. The reopening was also vitiated as it was based merely on investigation-wing information without any independent enquiry or live link demonstrating the AO's own "reason to believe," rendering it a case of borrowed satisfaction, so the consequent proceedings could not stand. Further, failure to dispose objections by a speaking order made the consequent assessment a nullity; therefore, the s.148 notice and reassessment were set aside and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.