https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356113 The court upheld the validity of the notice for reopening the assessment beyond four years, citing the Assessing Officer's receipt of fresh information indicating non-genuine transactions. It determined that the reopening was justified due to the failure to fully disclose material facts. The court rejected claims of a change of opinion, emphasizing the new material basis for the reassessment. Additionally, it affirmed the sufficiency of reasons for reopening, stating that the Assessing Officer had tangible material to support the belief of escaped income. The court also clarified that the newly inserted proviso to section 68 could apply retroactively if the facts warranted. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356113 The court upheld the validity of the notice for reopening the assessment beyond four years, citing the Assessing Officer's receipt of fresh information indicating non-genuine transactions. It determined that the reopening was justified due to the failure to fully disclose material facts. The court rejected claims of a change of opinion, emphasizing the new material basis for the reassessment. Additionally, it affirmed the sufficiency of reasons for reopening, stating that the Assessing Officer had tangible material to support the belief of escaped income. The court also clarified that the newly inserted proviso to section 68 could apply retroactively if the facts warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356113