https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361168 The court upheld the reopening of assessment for the AY 2010-2011 based on alleged bogus investments received by the petitioner from shell companies. It found that the Assessing Officer had valid reasons to believe income had escaped assessment, considering the information from the Investigation Wing. The court also justified the issuance of the notice beyond the four-year period, as the Assessing Officer had formed a reasonable belief. Despite concerns about extraneous material and discreet inquiries, the court dismissed the petition, affirming the validity of the notice under Section 148. en-us Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 May 2018 13:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361168 The court upheld the reopening of assessment for the AY 2010-2011 based on alleged bogus investments received by the petitioner from shell companies. It found that the Assessing Officer had valid reasons to believe income had escaped assessment, considering the information from the Investigation Wing. The court also justified the issuance of the notice beyond the four-year period, as the Assessing Officer had formed a reasonable belief. Despite concerns about extraneous material and discreet inquiries, the court dismissed the petition, affirming the validity of the notice under Section 148. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361168