https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100950 Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible. en-us Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:59 +0530 Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:05:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100950 Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:59 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100950