https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782738 ITAT set aside the reassessment holding the reopening invalid for want of prior approval from the competent authority as mandated under the Act. Despite repeated requests, neither the AO nor CIT(A) produced any approval, and even the Revenue's written communication admitted that approval of the Pr.CIT was not available on record or ITBA. ITAT held that, in absence of valid sanction, the reopening was bad in law. On merits, ITAT further observed that the lower authorities failed to investigate the assessee's claim that the impugned shares were purchased in 2009 and made additions solely on investigation wing information. The assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782738 ITAT set aside the reassessment holding the reopening invalid for want of prior approval from the competent authority as mandated under the Act. Despite repeated requests, neither the AO nor CIT(A) produced any approval, and even the Revenue's written communication admitted that approval of the Pr.CIT was not available on record or ITBA. ITAT held that, in absence of valid sanction, the reopening was bad in law. On merits, ITAT further observed that the lower authorities failed to investigate the assessee's claim that the impugned shares were purchased in 2009 and made additions solely on investigation wing information. The assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782738