https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27375 The court held that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment based on an audit note as "information" under section 147(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Relying on the precedent set in a previous case, the court emphasized that an audit note does not constitute valid information for reassessment. It was determined that the ITO's actions amounted to a change of opinion rather than addressing escaped assessment, leading to the court granting the petition and quashing the reassessment order, declaring it void of jurisdiction or legal authority. en-us Wed, 27 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:46:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27375 The court held that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment based on an audit note as "information" under section 147(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Relying on the precedent set in a previous case, the court emphasized that an audit note does not constitute valid information for reassessment. It was determined that the ITO's actions amounted to a change of opinion rather than addressing escaped assessment, leading to the court granting the petition and quashing the reassessment order, declaring it void of jurisdiction or legal authority. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27375