https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348658 The court dismissed the petition challenging the reopening notice for assessment year 2009-2010 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The court held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer were valid, including the applicability of Section 2(22)(e) regarding deemed dividend. The court emphasized that the AO's belief in income escapement suffices for reopening assessments, even if based on information from another AO. The petitioner's argument against the notice's validity and applicability of Section 2(22)(e) was rejected, leading to the dismissal of the petition and vacating of interim relief. en-us Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348658 The court dismissed the petition challenging the reopening notice for assessment year 2009-2010 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The court held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer were valid, including the applicability of Section 2(22)(e) regarding deemed dividend. The court emphasized that the AO's belief in income escapement suffices for reopening assessments, even if based on information from another AO. The petitioner's argument against the notice's validity and applicability of Section 2(22)(e) was rejected, leading to the dismissal of the petition and vacating of interim relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348658