<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (5) TMI 996 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791794</link>
    <description>Reassessment under sections 148A and 148 was unsustainable because the section 148A(d) order did not meaningfully address the assessee&#039;s reply and supporting documents regarding the source of immovable property investment. The extended limitation under section 149(1)(b) applies only where the Assessing Officer possesses books, documents, or evidence showing escaped income represented in the form of an asset of fifty lakh rupees or more. On the facts, the material did not meet that statutory threshold, as the alleged unexplained component was far below the limit and the full purchase value could not be treated as escaped income. The reopening and the assessment under section 147 were therefore quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 May 2026 10:36:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=902504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 996 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791794</link>
      <description>Reassessment under sections 148A and 148 was unsustainable because the section 148A(d) order did not meaningfully address the assessee&#039;s reply and supporting documents regarding the source of immovable property investment. The extended limitation under section 149(1)(b) applies only where the Assessing Officer possesses books, documents, or evidence showing escaped income represented in the form of an asset of fifty lakh rupees or more. On the facts, the material did not meet that statutory threshold, as the alleged unexplained component was far below the limit and the full purchase value could not be treated as escaped income. The reopening and the assessment under section 147 were therefore quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791794</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>