https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200160 Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 did not bar an intra-departmental referral of the assessee's accounts for scrutiny in connection with the assessee's own assessment, because the examining officer was not a stranger to the proceedings and the disclosure was not for an outside purpose. Reopening under section 15 of the Excess Profits Tax Act was upheld because the assessing officer received definite new information based on fresh facts, including undervaluation of stock, differential pricing, unexplained cash credits, and unclosed accounts; mere possession of books or materials was insufficient without actual awareness of their contents. The reassessment therefore stood, and the confidentiality objection failed. en-us Tue, 10 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:24:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200160 Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 did not bar an intra-departmental referral of the assessee's accounts for scrutiny in connection with the assessee's own assessment, because the examining officer was not a stranger to the proceedings and the disclosure was not for an outside purpose. Reopening under section 15 of the Excess Profits Tax Act was upheld because the assessing officer received definite new information based on fresh facts, including undervaluation of stock, differential pricing, unexplained cash credits, and unclosed accounts; mere possession of books or materials was insufficient without actual awareness of their contents. The reassessment therefore stood, and the confidentiality objection failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200160