<?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 (9) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798111</link>
    <description>Reassessment notices and consequential orders were invalid where the recorded reasons rested on unverified and factually incorrect information. For one assessment year, reopening proceeded on the false premise that the assessee had not filed a return, and transaction descriptions were ambiguous. For the other, the notice lacked transaction-wise and party-wise particulars, incorrectly characterised bank transactions and amounts advanced as undisclosed income, and relied on an unverified aggregate. A substantial later reduction in the alleged escaped income reinforced the lack of verification. These defects established non-application of mind both in recording reasons and granting statutory approval, requiring the notices and consequential reassessment orders to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 08:30:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=920304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798111</link>
      <description>Reassessment notices and consequential orders were invalid where the recorded reasons rested on unverified and factually incorrect information. For one assessment year, reopening proceeded on the false premise that the assessee had not filed a return, and transaction descriptions were ambiguous. For the other, the notice lacked transaction-wise and party-wise particulars, incorrectly characterised bank transactions and amounts advanced as undisclosed income, and relied on an unverified aggregate. A substantial later reduction in the alleged escaped income reinforced the lack of verification. These defects established non-application of mind both in recording reasons and granting statutory approval, requiring the notices and consequential reassessment orders to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>