https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430218 Reassessment under Section 148 was treated as invalid where the Assessing Officer had already examined the investment in the pension policy, the source of funds, the premature surrender and the surrender value in an earlier inquiry, and the assessee had not claimed deduction under Section 80CCC(1). Because Section 80CCC(2) applies only where the amount invested was allowed as a deduction under Section 80CCC(1), the reopening rested on an incorrect premise and merely re-verified material already on record. The court therefore treated the action as a fishing inquiry rather than reassessment based on fresh tangible material, and the notice and rejection of objections were set aside. en-us Fri, 11 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2026 15:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430218 Reassessment under Section 148 was treated as invalid where the Assessing Officer had already examined the investment in the pension policy, the source of funds, the premature surrender and the surrender value in an earlier inquiry, and the assessee had not claimed deduction under Section 80CCC(1). Because Section 80CCC(2) applies only where the amount invested was allowed as a deduction under Section 80CCC(1), the reopening rested on an incorrect premise and merely re-verified material already on record. The court therefore treated the action as a fishing inquiry rather than reassessment based on fresh tangible material, and the notice and rejection of objections were set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 11 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430218