<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (1) TMI 73 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432326</link>
    <description>Reopening of assessment beyond four years under section 148 requires recorded reasons to show failure to fully and truly disclose material facts. Where that jurisdictional fact is absent, and the notice is based only on a change of opinion, the reopening cannot be sustained. The recorded reasons in this instance did not disclose the required non-disclosure by the assessee, so the notice was invalid and the High Court&#039;s quashing of it was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2023 08:23:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=700541" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 73 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432326</link>
      <description>Reopening of assessment beyond four years under section 148 requires recorded reasons to show failure to fully and truly disclose material facts. Where that jurisdictional fact is absent, and the notice is based only on a change of opinion, the reopening cannot be sustained. The recorded reasons in this instance did not disclose the required non-disclosure by the assessee, so the notice was invalid and the High Court&#039;s quashing of it was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>