https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407151 The court found that the notice issued under section 153A of the Income Tax Act lacked tangible evidence of undisclosed investments in the petitioner's assets. As the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond the six-year limit, the court emphasized strict interpretation of the legal provisions. Considering the jurisdictional issue, the court granted an interim stay on the notice, highlighting the necessity of tangible evidence for invoking jurisdiction under section 153A and the importance of adhering to legal provisions in assessment proceedings. Further hearings were scheduled to deliberate on the matter. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 May 2021 09:30:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407151 The court found that the notice issued under section 153A of the Income Tax Act lacked tangible evidence of undisclosed investments in the petitioner's assets. As the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond the six-year limit, the court emphasized strict interpretation of the legal provisions. Considering the jurisdictional issue, the court granted an interim stay on the notice, highlighting the necessity of tangible evidence for invoking jurisdiction under section 153A and the importance of adhering to legal provisions in assessment proceedings. Further hearings were scheduled to deliberate on the matter. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407151