https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401194 Reassessment initiated after four years is valid where the recorded reasons for reopening specifically refer to escapement of income and assert that the assessee did not fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer's reasons, read as a whole, were sufficient to confer jurisdiction to reopen the assessment, and the Tribunal's contrary view was unsustainable because it did not properly examine those recorded reasons. The legal principle is that jurisdiction for reopening beyond four years arises when the reasons themselves disclose both escapement and nondisclosure of material facts; a finding rejecting that basis without proper scrutiny is perverse. en-us Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Nov 2020 11:20:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401194 Reassessment initiated after four years is valid where the recorded reasons for reopening specifically refer to escapement of income and assert that the assessee did not fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer's reasons, read as a whole, were sufficient to confer jurisdiction to reopen the assessment, and the Tribunal's contrary view was unsustainable because it did not properly examine those recorded reasons. The legal principle is that jurisdiction for reopening beyond four years arises when the reasons themselves disclose both escapement and nondisclosure of material facts; a finding rejecting that basis without proper scrutiny is perverse. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401194