https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251906 The court set aside the notice dated 30.03.2009 and the subsequent order dated 23.11.2009, ruling in favor of the petitioner/assessee. It was determined that the reassessment proceedings were not valid beyond four years as the petitioner had fully disclosed all material facts during the original assessment. The court emphasized that the mere belief of income escapement is insufficient for reopening assessments and specific undisclosed material facts must be identified. The court allowed the writ petition, annulling the notice and order, without delving into the nature of royalty payments. en-us Thu, 25 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Feb 2015 18:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251906 The court set aside the notice dated 30.03.2009 and the subsequent order dated 23.11.2009, ruling in favor of the petitioner/assessee. It was determined that the reassessment proceedings were not valid beyond four years as the petitioner had fully disclosed all material facts during the original assessment. The court emphasized that the mere belief of income escapement is insufficient for reopening assessments and specific undisclosed material facts must be identified. The court allowed the writ petition, annulling the notice and order, without delving into the nature of royalty payments. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251906