https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39327 The court held that the Expenditure-tax Officer had jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under section 16(b) of the Expenditure-tax Act based on new information indicating escaped taxable expenditure. The finality of the Tribunal's order did not prevent reassessment for unconsidered provisions. The court emphasized the distinction between sections 4(i) and 4(ii) of the Act and validated the information used for reopening. The Expenditure-tax Officer's actions were deemed lawful, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and denial of the writ petition. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:42:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39327 The court held that the Expenditure-tax Officer had jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under section 16(b) of the Expenditure-tax Act based on new information indicating escaped taxable expenditure. The finality of the Tribunal's order did not prevent reassessment for unconsidered provisions. The court emphasized the distinction between sections 4(i) and 4(ii) of the Act and validated the information used for reopening. The Expenditure-tax Officer's actions were deemed lawful, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and denial of the writ petition. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39327