<?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 1586 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782118</link>
    <description>ITAT Delhi held that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The assessee had in fact filed a return of income for the relevant year, along with audited accounts and bank details reflecting turnover from a readymade garments business. Examination of the purchase register, bank statements, and payments to suppliers showed that the impugned cash deposits were aligned with business sales and withdrawals used for purchases. The only deficiency was absence of PAN details in the initial information, which could not justify reopening. The Tribunal held that the AO lacked a valid &quot;reason to believe&quot; that income had escaped assessment and quashed the reassessment, deciding in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2025 13:56:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=866961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1586 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782118</link>
      <description>ITAT Delhi held that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The assessee had in fact filed a return of income for the relevant year, along with audited accounts and bank details reflecting turnover from a readymade garments business. Examination of the purchase register, bank statements, and payments to suppliers showed that the impugned cash deposits were aligned with business sales and withdrawals used for purchases. The only deficiency was absence of PAN details in the initial information, which could not justify reopening. The Tribunal held that the AO lacked a valid &quot;reason to believe&quot; that income had escaped assessment and quashed the reassessment, deciding in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782118</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>