https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784179 Reopening under s.148A(1) was challenged on the ground that the AO lacked "information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" and impermissibly initiated a roving inquiry. The HC held that s.148A(1) confines the AO to verifying information available on the insight portal and requires a literal application of the statutory threshold; mere consolidated debit/credit entries supplied by a bank, without any further incriminating material, do not justify expanding the inquiry by demanding exhaustive party-wise details already traceable through banking channels. The AO was found to have travelled beyond jurisdiction under s.148A(1), and the reopening action was set aside; the writ petition was allowed. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 15:21:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784179 Reopening under s.148A(1) was challenged on the ground that the AO lacked "information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" and impermissibly initiated a roving inquiry. The HC held that s.148A(1) confines the AO to verifying information available on the insight portal and requires a literal application of the statutory threshold; mere consolidated debit/credit entries supplied by a bank, without any further incriminating material, do not justify expanding the inquiry by demanding exhaustive party-wise details already traceable through banking channels. The AO was found to have travelled beyond jurisdiction under s.148A(1), and the reopening action was set aside; the writ petition was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784179