https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200207 The article explains the limitation scheme under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, noting that the ordinary four-year period could be extended where material supported application of section 28(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. On the facts discussed, the share-loss claim was treated as collusive, certain deposits were regarded as income from undisclosed sources, and the interest claim was linked to non-genuine loans, so the concealment provisions were attracted and the assessment fell within the extended time limit. It also notes that no separate recording of reasons by the Income-tax Officer within the ordinary limitation period was required, so long as the record supported the view that section 28(1)(c) applied. en-us Fri, 03 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 14:27:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200207 The article explains the limitation scheme under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, noting that the ordinary four-year period could be extended where material supported application of section 28(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. On the facts discussed, the share-loss claim was treated as collusive, certain deposits were regarded as income from undisclosed sources, and the interest claim was linked to non-genuine loans, so the concealment provisions were attracted and the assessment fell within the extended time limit. It also notes that no separate recording of reasons by the Income-tax Officer within the ordinary limitation period was required, so long as the record supported the view that section 28(1)(c) applied. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200207