https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191006 The court upheld the validity of the assessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, finding that the Income-tax Officer had reasonable grounds to believe the assessee's income was under-assessed due to nondisclosure of material facts. The court concluded that the initiation of the second proceeding under section 34(1)(a) was justified within the period of limitation. The Tribunal's findings were deemed based on evidence, and as the assessee did not challenge them properly, the court affirmed the assessment's validity and ordered the applicant to pay costs to the respondent. en-us Fri, 10 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:28:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191006 The court upheld the validity of the assessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, finding that the Income-tax Officer had reasonable grounds to believe the assessee's income was under-assessed due to nondisclosure of material facts. The court concluded that the initiation of the second proceeding under section 34(1)(a) was justified within the period of limitation. The Tribunal's findings were deemed based on evidence, and as the assessee did not challenge them properly, the court affirmed the assessment's validity and ordered the applicant to pay costs to the respondent. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191006