https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763685 Delhi HC held that reassessment notice for AY 2014-15 issued beyond six years was time-barred and invalid. Court ruled that mere uploading of information by investigation wing cannot substitute proper satisfaction note recording by AO under section 153C. Since no asset representing escaped income was identified, ten-year reopening period under section 153A was inapplicable. The six-year limitation period applied, making the notices under sections 148A(b) and 148 legally invalid. Petition allowed, impugned notices set aside in favor of assessee. en-us Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Dec 2024 08:45:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763685 Delhi HC held that reassessment notice for AY 2014-15 issued beyond six years was time-barred and invalid. Court ruled that mere uploading of information by investigation wing cannot substitute proper satisfaction note recording by AO under section 153C. Since no asset representing escaped income was identified, ten-year reopening period under section 153A was inapplicable. The six-year limitation period applied, making the notices under sections 148A(b) and 148 legally invalid. Petition allowed, impugned notices set aside in favor of assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763685