https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444618 The court addressed multiple issues in the case, primarily focusing on the invalidity of the assessment order due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), as mandated by CBDT circulars. The court found that the jurisdiction assumed under section 153C was improperly upheld, and the approval under section 153D was granted mechanically. Additionally, the court emphasized the necessity of granting cross-examination rights during assessments and questioned the validity of additions made for unexplained cash and profits. The court highlighted the critical importance of compliance with legal requirements and CBDT circulars, ultimately ruling the assessment order invalid. en-us Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:36:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444618 The court addressed multiple issues in the case, primarily focusing on the invalidity of the assessment order due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), as mandated by CBDT circulars. The court found that the jurisdiction assumed under section 153C was improperly upheld, and the approval under section 153D was granted mechanically. Additionally, the court emphasized the necessity of granting cross-examination rights during assessments and questioned the validity of additions made for unexplained cash and profits. The court highlighted the critical importance of compliance with legal requirements and CBDT circulars, ultimately ruling the assessment order invalid. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444618