https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778936 ITAT upheld the appellate order and dismissed the Revenue appeal, holding that the AO lacked jurisdiction to make additions not specified in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). Two additions (sale consideration from unlisted shares and commission for arranging accommodation entries) were not part of the reasons for reopening; since the escaped income identified in the reasons was not assessed, the AO could not independently assess other income discovered during reassessment proceedings. The assessment additions made beyond the scope of the recorded reasons were therefore invalid. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Sep 2025 08:37:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778936 ITAT upheld the appellate order and dismissed the Revenue appeal, holding that the AO lacked jurisdiction to make additions not specified in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). Two additions (sale consideration from unlisted shares and commission for arranging accommodation entries) were not part of the reasons for reopening; since the escaped income identified in the reasons was not assessed, the AO could not independently assess other income discovered during reassessment proceedings. The assessment additions made beyond the scope of the recorded reasons were therefore invalid. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778936