https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780762 HC held that the Assessing Officer validly exercised jurisdiction under s.158BD to assess undisclosed income, and concurrent findings of fact by two fora established suppression of income based on witness evidence and documentary entries. The court reiterated that s.260A questions require a substantial question of law, not merely a question of law, and found no substantial question arising from the case. Consequently the Tribunal's and AO's determinations assessing the undisclosed income were upheld and the petition seeking interference under s.260A was dismissed. en-us Thu, 25 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2025 08:35:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780762 HC held that the Assessing Officer validly exercised jurisdiction under s.158BD to assess undisclosed income, and concurrent findings of fact by two fora established suppression of income based on witness evidence and documentary entries. The court reiterated that s.260A questions require a substantial question of law, not merely a question of law, and found no substantial question arising from the case. Consequently the Tribunal's and AO's determinations assessing the undisclosed income were upheld and the petition seeking interference under s.260A was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780762