https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756727 The Rajasthan HC dismissed a writ petition challenging reopening of assessment under section 147 of the IT Act. The petitioner-company claimed no knowledge of 13 plots sold by their power of attorney holder for cash considerations. The HC held that the AO properly provided required information under section 148A, and detailed merit adjudication isn't required at this stage. The court ruled that under agency law, the company remains bound by acts of its power of attorney holder, regardless of claimed lack of knowledge. Any disputes regarding unauthorized acts by the power of attorney holder must be resolved elsewhere, not through writ jurisdiction. en-us Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Aug 2024 09:10:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756727 The Rajasthan HC dismissed a writ petition challenging reopening of assessment under section 147 of the IT Act. The petitioner-company claimed no knowledge of 13 plots sold by their power of attorney holder for cash considerations. The HC held that the AO properly provided required information under section 148A, and detailed merit adjudication isn't required at this stage. The court ruled that under agency law, the company remains bound by acts of its power of attorney holder, regardless of claimed lack of knowledge. Any disputes regarding unauthorized acts by the power of attorney holder must be resolved elsewhere, not through writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756727