https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466279 Reopening of assessment was invalid because the statutory faceless assessment notification required a Faceless Assessing Officer to issue the section 148 notice, but the notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; consequence: the reopening notice was quashed. Additions under the unexplained investments provision were unsustainable because the alleged purchases were recorded in regular books and payments were made through normal banking channels, so no unexplained expenditure outside books was shown; consequence: Sec.69C-style additions were rejected. en-us Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:55:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466279 Reopening of assessment was invalid because the statutory faceless assessment notification required a Faceless Assessing Officer to issue the section 148 notice, but the notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; consequence: the reopening notice was quashed. Additions under the unexplained investments provision were unsustainable because the alleged purchases were recorded in regular books and payments were made through normal banking channels, so no unexplained expenditure outside books was shown; consequence: Sec.69C-style additions were rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466279