https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357100 The court found in favor of the petitioner, holding that the notice issued under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2010-2011 was without jurisdiction. The court emphasized the duty of the assessee to make full disclosure of all primary facts during assessment proceedings. It was determined that the petitioner had provided necessary details regarding the change in shareholding pattern and payments made in foreign exchange to players during the original assessment, making the reopening notice beyond the statutory period impermissible. An interim stay was granted in favor of the petitioner. en-us Thu, 08 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:02:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357100 The court found in favor of the petitioner, holding that the notice issued under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2010-2011 was without jurisdiction. The court emphasized the duty of the assessee to make full disclosure of all primary facts during assessment proceedings. It was determined that the petitioner had provided necessary details regarding the change in shareholding pattern and payments made in foreign exchange to players during the original assessment, making the reopening notice beyond the statutory period impermissible. An interim stay was granted in favor of the petitioner. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357100