https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260953 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of the provision for doubtful debt, as the reassessment was deemed to be based on a change of opinion rather than a failure to disclose material facts. The Tribunal found the reopening after four years lacked justification under section 147, as there was no default in disclosure by the assessee. Relying on relevant case laws, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, concluding the reassessment was without jurisdiction. The order was pronounced on April 29, 2015. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jun 2015 06:29:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260953 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of the provision for doubtful debt, as the reassessment was deemed to be based on a change of opinion rather than a failure to disclose material facts. The Tribunal found the reopening after four years lacked justification under section 147, as there was no default in disclosure by the assessee. Relying on relevant case laws, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, concluding the reassessment was without jurisdiction. The order was pronounced on April 29, 2015. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260953