https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367127 HRA exemption under section 10(13A) was confined to the extent supported by evidence, because the assessee failed to prove actual rent payment and the claim had to satisfy the statutory computation under Rule 2A; the excess exemption was therefore disallowed. Reassessment under sections 147 and 148 was also sustained because the recorded reasons concerned credit card expenditure and the absence of a return in the system, and the reassessment examined the source of that expenditure in substance. The return filed under a wrong PAN was treated as non est for reopening purposes, so the challenge to the reassessment failed and the assessment was upheld. en-us Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Sep 2018 07:39:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367127 HRA exemption under section 10(13A) was confined to the extent supported by evidence, because the assessee failed to prove actual rent payment and the claim had to satisfy the statutory computation under Rule 2A; the excess exemption was therefore disallowed. Reassessment under sections 147 and 148 was also sustained because the recorded reasons concerned credit card expenditure and the absence of a return in the system, and the reassessment examined the source of that expenditure in substance. The return filed under a wrong PAN was treated as non est for reopening purposes, so the challenge to the reassessment failed and the assessment was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367127