https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331616 The High Court held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as the reasons for reopening were factually incorrect, and the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not coherent with the reasons recorded for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that if the AO accepts that the income initially believed to have escaped assessment did not actually escape, he cannot independently assess other income without issuing a fresh notice under section 148. Additionally, the Court affirmed the eligibility for deduction under section 57 and the retrospective applicability of the amendment to section 12A(2) for trusts not registered under section 12AA. en-us Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Aug 2016 11:29:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331616 The High Court held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as the reasons for reopening were factually incorrect, and the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not coherent with the reasons recorded for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that if the AO accepts that the income initially believed to have escaped assessment did not actually escape, he cannot independently assess other income without issuing a fresh notice under section 148. Additionally, the Court affirmed the eligibility for deduction under section 57 and the retrospective applicability of the amendment to section 12A(2) for trusts not registered under section 12AA. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331616