Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
Reopening under Section 148 based on search material requires prima facie evidence showing a live link between the seized document and the assessee; the expressions "pertains to" and "relates to" cannot be read in vacuum. Here, the loose paper predated the assessee's purchase by nearly two years, did not name him, and the broker's statement did not refer to him or establish any connection with the named broker. The alleged on-money inference rested only on external matching of survey details, which was too vague and disconnected to satisfy the jurisdictional threshold. The writ petition was allowed and the reopening notices were quashed.
Reopening under Section 148 based on search material requires prima facie evidence showing a live link between the seized document and the assessee; the expressions "pertains to" and "relates to" cannot be read in vacuum. Here, the loose paper predated the assessee's purchase by nearly two years, did not name him, and the broker's statement did not refer to him or establish any connection with the named broker. The alleged on-money inference rested only on external matching of survey details, which was too vague and disconnected to satisfy the jurisdictional threshold. The writ petition was allowed and the reopening notices were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.