Reopening Without Tangible Evidence of Income Escapement is bad in law: HC

Dinesh Kumar Goyal HUF Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court) Introduction: The case of Dinesh Kumar Goyal HUF Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court) revolves around the challenge to a Section 148A(d) order for the assessment year 2017-18. The appellant contests the reopening, emphasizing the absence of tangible material indicating income escapement. Detailed Analysis: The assessing officer initiated reopening based on cash deposits, interest receipts, and debenture purchases. The appellant, having previously succeeded in challenging a similar action for the assessment year 2016-17, now faced a notice under Secti...