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 of assessment beyond four years failed because the recorded reasons did not show any omission by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, and relied only on material already on record; the reassessment notice and proceedings for A.Y. 2011-12 were therefore invalid. On merits, the addition under section 68 for share capital and share premium was deleted because the assessee produced evidence of investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness, including banking and corporate records. The Tribunal also noted that the pre-2013 position did not require proof of source of source, and that premium-related doubts, section 56(2)(viib), and the later amendment to section 68 did not justify the addition on the facts stated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.