https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785570 Reopening of assessment was challenged on adequacy of reasons to believe; HC examined whether seized documents and third-party statements created a live link to the assessee and found they did not, noting seized register did not name the assessee or co-owner and transactional inconsistencies undermined the inference of unrecorded cash. The Assessing Officers valuation discrepancy alone, without independent corroborative material tying the petitioner to alleged 'on money' payments, was insufficient, and the impugned notice for reopening was quashed in favour of the assessee by the HC. en-us Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jul 2026 10:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785570 Reopening of assessment was challenged on adequacy of reasons to believe; HC examined whether seized documents and third-party statements created a live link to the assessee and found they did not, noting seized register did not name the assessee or co-owner and transactional inconsistencies undermined the inference of unrecorded cash. The Assessing Officers valuation discrepancy alone, without independent corroborative material tying the petitioner to alleged 'on money' payments, was insufficient, and the impugned notice for reopening was quashed in favour of the assessee by the HC. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785570