https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332776 The court dismissed the petition, upholding the validity of the notice for reopening the assessment based on the alleged suppression of long-term capital gain under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner's failure to disclose the revised valuation by the stamp duty authority justified the reopening beyond four years. However, the court found that the ground related to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was not sufficient for reopening as all relevant facts were disclosed. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was allowed to contest the correct capital gain to be taxed under Section 50C. en-us Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Sep 2016 10:41:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332776 The court dismissed the petition, upholding the validity of the notice for reopening the assessment based on the alleged suppression of long-term capital gain under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner's failure to disclose the revised valuation by the stamp duty authority justified the reopening beyond four years. However, the court found that the ground related to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was not sufficient for reopening as all relevant facts were disclosed. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was allowed to contest the correct capital gain to be taxed under Section 50C. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332776