Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Reopening under s.147 was held invalid because the recorded reasons did not demonstrate a clear, direct nexus between the stated transaction discrepancies and any escapement of income, rendering the belief speculative; accordingly, the reassessment was quashed. Independently, the s.68 addition for alleged unexplained credits was deleted as the taxpayer discharged the statutory onus by furnishing cogent documentary evidence establishing identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the credit, and the loan was also repaid; the appellate confirmation of the addition was set aside. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.