<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (11) TMI 340 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780872</link>
    <description>HC held that reopening of assessment under s.147 was invalid where the AO relied solely on the DVO&#039;s report without making independent inquiries under s.148A(a) or recording satisfaction about the report&#039;s correctness. The DVO&#039;s opinion was not treated as information per se, and the AO failed to apply his mind to verify facts supporting escaped income. Consequently the notice issued under s.148 and the assumption of jurisdiction under s.147 were without authority of law and could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=862851" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 340 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780872</link>
      <description>HC held that reopening of assessment under s.147 was invalid where the AO relied solely on the DVO&#039;s report without making independent inquiries under s.148A(a) or recording satisfaction about the report&#039;s correctness. The DVO&#039;s opinion was not treated as information per se, and the AO failed to apply his mind to verify facts supporting escaped income. Consequently the notice issued under s.148 and the assumption of jurisdiction under s.147 were without authority of law and could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>