https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362343 The Tribunal quashed the reassessment orders for both assessment years, ruling that the reassessment lacked independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and the opportunity for cross-examination, which were not provided. Consequently, the additions based on alleged bogus purchases were invalidated. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and the requirement for AOs to verify information independently before initiating reassessment. en-us Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jun 2018 23:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362343 The Tribunal quashed the reassessment orders for both assessment years, ruling that the reassessment lacked independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and the opportunity for cross-examination, which were not provided. Consequently, the additions based on alleged bogus purchases were invalidated. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and the requirement for AOs to verify information independently before initiating reassessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362343