https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780441 The HC held the assessment flawed: the AO ignored a supplier's timely Section 133(6) reply and supporting documents, relied on non-existent judicial decisions (apparently from unverified AI outputs) when adding peak loan balances, and failed to disclose basis or issue a show-cause notice. Exercising jurisdiction under Art. 226, the HC set aside the order and remanded to the AO to issue a fresh SCN specifying proposed additions, grant reasonable time and opportunity to the assessee to reply, and provide a personal hearing before passing a fresh assessment. en-us Mon, 06 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780441 The HC held the assessment flawed: the AO ignored a supplier's timely Section 133(6) reply and supporting documents, relied on non-existent judicial decisions (apparently from unverified AI outputs) when adding peak loan balances, and failed to disclose basis or issue a show-cause notice. Exercising jurisdiction under Art. 226, the HC set aside the order and remanded to the AO to issue a fresh SCN specifying proposed additions, grant reasonable time and opportunity to the assessee to reply, and provide a personal hearing before passing a fresh assessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780441