https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221920 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the notice seeking to reopen the assessment beyond four years. The court emphasized that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for the assessment. It highlighted that subsequent judicial decisions or legislative amendments after the assessment order cannot justify reopening without such failure. Therefore, the court concluded that the grounds for reopening were based on events post-assessment and lacked the essential condition for reopening beyond four years. en-us Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jul 2013 10:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221920 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the notice seeking to reopen the assessment beyond four years. The court emphasized that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for the assessment. It highlighted that subsequent judicial decisions or legislative amendments after the assessment order cannot justify reopening without such failure. Therefore, the court concluded that the grounds for reopening were based on events post-assessment and lacked the essential condition for reopening beyond four years. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221920