https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12654 Reassessment under s.147(a) was upheld because the AO had "reason to believe" income had escaped assessment and that such escapement arose from the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, namely non-disclosure of multiple investments; consequently, initiation of proceedings was held valid. The plea regarding limitation/service was rejected on the finding that the assessment was made within limitation and that service difficulties were attributable to the assessee's obstructive conduct. The CIT(A)'s remand of certain additions was sustained since the appellate authority may remand where further investigation or adequate opportunity is required, and a consequential order had already been passed and was under appeal. The appeal was dismissed in limine. en-us Wed, 08 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 15:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12654 Reassessment under s.147(a) was upheld because the AO had "reason to believe" income had escaped assessment and that such escapement arose from the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, namely non-disclosure of multiple investments; consequently, initiation of proceedings was held valid. The plea regarding limitation/service was rejected on the finding that the assessment was made within limitation and that service difficulties were attributable to the assessee's obstructive conduct. The CIT(A)'s remand of certain additions was sustained since the appellate authority may remand where further investigation or adequate opportunity is required, and a consequential order had already been passed and was under appeal. The appeal was dismissed in limine. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12654