https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6258 Section 34(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 required the Income-tax Officer to have reason to believe, on reasonable grounds and supported by relevant material, that income had escaped assessment before issuing notice. Mere suspicion was insufficient. The recorded reasons referred only to vague assertions of secret profits and a large payment from the Oberois, but disclosed no factual basis capable of supporting the statutory belief. Because the jurisdictional condition precedent was not met, the notices were held illegal and invalid, and the assessee's challenge succeeded. en-us Thu, 12 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jun 2025 16:06:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6258 Section 34(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 required the Income-tax Officer to have reason to believe, on reasonable grounds and supported by relevant material, that income had escaped assessment before issuing notice. Mere suspicion was insufficient. The recorded reasons referred only to vague assertions of secret profits and a large payment from the Oberois, but disclosed no factual basis capable of supporting the statutory belief. Because the jurisdictional condition precedent was not met, the notices were held illegal and invalid, and the assessee's challenge succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6258