https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215235 In block assessment proceedings, omission to mention the block period in a notice under Section 158BD was treated as a procedural irregularity that did not vitiate jurisdiction where the assessee understood the process, participated, and the satisfaction requirement was otherwise reflected in the record. A statement recorded during income-tax inquiry under Section 131 was treated as an admission and was not discarded for alleged non-compliance with civil or criminal procedure rules; the belated retraction, unsupported by proof of coercion, was rejected. The assessment was sustained because the statement was read with seized documents and surrounding material, which corroborated the undisclosed income addition. en-us Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215235 In block assessment proceedings, omission to mention the block period in a notice under Section 158BD was treated as a procedural irregularity that did not vitiate jurisdiction where the assessee understood the process, participated, and the satisfaction requirement was otherwise reflected in the record. A statement recorded during income-tax inquiry under Section 131 was treated as an admission and was not discarded for alleged non-compliance with civil or criminal procedure rules; the belated retraction, unsupported by proof of coercion, was rejected. The assessment was sustained because the statement was read with seized documents and surrounding material, which corroborated the undisclosed income addition. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215235