https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789484 Notice under section 143(2) was treated as valid because the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment had issued it, so the jurisdictional objection failed. Additional evidence on the unsecured-loan issue was admitted under Rule 29, and the matter was restored for fresh adjudication after compliance with Rule 46A(3), including a remand report and hearing of both sides. Ad hoc disallowances of handling, transportation and other expenses were deleted because the books of account had not been rejected under section 145(3); estimation on suspicion or guesswork was not sustained. en-us Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789484 Notice under section 143(2) was treated as valid because the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment had issued it, so the jurisdictional objection failed. Additional evidence on the unsecured-loan issue was admitted under Rule 29, and the matter was restored for fresh adjudication after compliance with Rule 46A(3), including a remand report and hearing of both sides. Ad hoc disallowances of handling, transportation and other expenses were deleted because the books of account had not been rejected under section 145(3); estimation on suspicion or guesswork was not sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789484