https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30971 HC held the reassessment invalid insofar as the Assessing Officer proceeded on matters not specified in the reasons for reopening under s.148(2); items in exhibits P7, P8 and P12 were beyond jurisdiction because s.148(2) was not complied with and no escapement was shown for those issues. As no fresh enquiry could be initiated after expiry of s.143(2) timelines, the directions relating to those items were quashed. The writ petition under Art.226 was held maintainable to challenge the excess jurisdiction. en-us Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 11:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30971 HC held the reassessment invalid insofar as the Assessing Officer proceeded on matters not specified in the reasons for reopening under s.148(2); items in exhibits P7, P8 and P12 were beyond jurisdiction because s.148(2) was not complied with and no escapement was shown for those issues. As no fresh enquiry could be initiated after expiry of s.143(2) timelines, the directions relating to those items were quashed. The writ petition under Art.226 was held maintainable to challenge the excess jurisdiction. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30971