https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27529 The court ruled that the Income Tax Officer was not justified in reopening the assessment under section 147(a) due to non-disclosure of investment in a pick-up van, as there was no legal requirement for such disclosure. The money received from the sister-in-law was deemed income from undisclosed sources based on factual evidence. The Tribunal's findings on the possession of the money were upheld. Questions 3 to 5 were dismissed for not being raised before the Tribunal. The court directed the Tribunal to refer question 1 to the court for interpretation of the law on disclosure requirements under section 147(a). en-us Sat, 12 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 13:40:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27529 The court ruled that the Income Tax Officer was not justified in reopening the assessment under section 147(a) due to non-disclosure of investment in a pick-up van, as there was no legal requirement for such disclosure. The money received from the sister-in-law was deemed income from undisclosed sources based on factual evidence. The Tribunal's findings on the possession of the money were upheld. Questions 3 to 5 were dismissed for not being raised before the Tribunal. The court directed the Tribunal to refer question 1 to the court for interpretation of the law on disclosure requirements under section 147(a). Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 12 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27529