https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793037 Reopening beyond three years under section 149(1)(b) requires seized material itself to show that escaped income is represented by an asset, expenditure, or relevant book entry; vague reasons and borrowed satisfaction do not sustain section 148 notices, so the reassessment for those years was quashed. On seized cash-book entries, a blanket inference that figures were written after truncating two zeroes was rejected for want of independent corroboration, but the 16% profit estimate was upheld on the facts; two-zero addition was confined only to entries supported by evidence. Third-party cash-payment additions were sustained where supported by signed corroborative material, and remanded for verification where the receipt was unsigned and the evidentiary basis was incomplete. en-us Fri, 05 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jun 2026 08:52:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793037 Reopening beyond three years under section 149(1)(b) requires seized material itself to show that escaped income is represented by an asset, expenditure, or relevant book entry; vague reasons and borrowed satisfaction do not sustain section 148 notices, so the reassessment for those years was quashed. On seized cash-book entries, a blanket inference that figures were written after truncating two zeroes was rejected for want of independent corroboration, but the 16% profit estimate was upheld on the facts; two-zero addition was confined only to entries supported by evidence. Third-party cash-payment additions were sustained where supported by signed corroborative material, and remanded for verification where the receipt was unsigned and the evidentiary basis was incomplete. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793037