https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388943 The court quashed the notice dated 09.03.2018 and the order dated 08.11.2018, ruling in favor of the petitioner. It held that the reopening of the assessment was unjustified as the Assessing Officer failed to determine expenditure correctly, which cannot be a basis for reassessment. Additionally, the notice issued beyond the four-year limitation period was deemed invalid due to the absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. The court underscored the significance of adherence to legal principles and preventing arbitrary exercise of power. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388943 The court quashed the notice dated 09.03.2018 and the order dated 08.11.2018, ruling in favor of the petitioner. It held that the reopening of the assessment was unjustified as the Assessing Officer failed to determine expenditure correctly, which cannot be a basis for reassessment. Additionally, the notice issued beyond the four-year limitation period was deemed invalid due to the absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. The court underscored the significance of adherence to legal principles and preventing arbitrary exercise of power. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388943