<?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 (8) TMI 1478 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797604</link>
    <description>Reassessment notices issued beyond four years under the pre-2021 regime could be sanctioned by any authority specified in Section 151(1), including the Principal Commissioner; exclusive approval by the Principal Chief Commissioner was not required. Valid jurisdiction nevertheless required recorded reasons showing a bona fide belief of escaped income and meaningful statutory satisfaction. Incorrect PAN details, the false assertion that no return was filed, absence of a link between reported transactions and escaped taxable income, failure to quantify escaped income at the statutory threshold, and an approval proposal repeating those defects demonstrated invalid jurisdiction. The reassessment notice, consequential reassessment and additions were therefore quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 08:34:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=918844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 1478 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797604</link>
      <description>Reassessment notices issued beyond four years under the pre-2021 regime could be sanctioned by any authority specified in Section 151(1), including the Principal Commissioner; exclusive approval by the Principal Chief Commissioner was not required. Valid jurisdiction nevertheless required recorded reasons showing a bona fide belief of escaped income and meaningful statutory satisfaction. Incorrect PAN details, the false assertion that no return was filed, absence of a link between reported transactions and escaped taxable income, failure to quantify escaped income at the statutory threshold, and an approval proposal repeating those defects demonstrated invalid jurisdiction. The reassessment notice, consequential reassessment and additions were therefore quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797604</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>