https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211445 Reassessment under the Income-tax Act requires tangible material and a live link to the belief that income has escaped assessment; a mere assumption or speculative suspicion is insufficient. The Bombay HC held that reopening based on an assumed factual premise that the assessee was an FII or sub-account taxable under Section 115AD could not sustain Section 148 notice, and that reasons recorded for reopening cannot be supplemented or improved later when objections are disposed of. The Court also rejected reliance on the electronic return format to infer non-disclosure, as the filing regime itself did not permit annexures. The notice and objection order were quashed. en-us Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211445 Reassessment under the Income-tax Act requires tangible material and a live link to the belief that income has escaped assessment; a mere assumption or speculative suspicion is insufficient. The Bombay HC held that reopening based on an assumed factual premise that the assessee was an FII or sub-account taxable under Section 115AD could not sustain Section 148 notice, and that reasons recorded for reopening cannot be supplemented or improved later when objections are disposed of. The Court also rejected reliance on the electronic return format to infer non-disclosure, as the filing regime itself did not permit annexures. The notice and objection order were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211445