https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6786 Omission of income from the return for the relevant assessment year was treated as a failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, so section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 applied and reopening was upheld. The Punjab HC held that the alleged inadmissibility of an affidavit did not vitiate the Tribunal's finding because the nondisclosure itself provided an independent basis for the conclusion. On the facts, the case did not fall under section 34(1)(b), and the reassessment was sustained in favour of the revenue. en-us Thu, 13 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6786 Omission of income from the return for the relevant assessment year was treated as a failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, so section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 applied and reopening was upheld. The Punjab HC held that the alleged inadmissibility of an affidavit did not vitiate the Tribunal's finding because the nondisclosure itself provided an independent basis for the conclusion. On the facts, the case did not fall under section 34(1)(b), and the reassessment was sustained in favour of the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6786