Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
Pre-trial bail granted where custodial period, documentary prosecution, and magistrate-triable offence favor release subject to surety and no witness ...
Allowability of Salary Exemptions: Form 16 entries can substantiate HRA and other salary exemptions, and home loan interest is deductible for a self-o...
Reopening beyond four years after an assessment under section 143(3) was invalid because the recorded reasons did not allege that the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The reassessment was initiated on Investigation Wing information about client code modification, but the relevant transactions and profit were already reflected in the contract notes and return, indicating no disclosed fraud or new material. The Tribunal treated the exercise as a mere change of opinion, noted that only a gist of reasons was supplied, the Investigation Wing report was not furnished, and no sanction under section 151 was produced. On these cumulative grounds, the reassessment was held illegal.
Reopening beyond four years after an assessment under section 143(3) was invalid because the recorded reasons did not allege that the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The reassessment was initiated on Investigation Wing information about client code modification, but the relevant transactions and profit were already reflected in the contract notes and return, indicating no disclosed fraud or new material. The Tribunal treated the exercise as a mere change of opinion, noted that only a gist of reasons was supplied, the Investigation Wing report was not furnished, and no sanction under section 151 was produced. On these cumulative grounds, the reassessment was held illegal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
