“Section 100(1)(c)”

When substantial justice and procedural technicalities are in conflict, especially in cases involving non-deliberate delay, the cause of substantial justice must be prioritized. The opposing party cannot claim a vested right to benefit from injustice due to such delays.

For income-tax notices, particularly under Section 34(1) of the 1922 Act (corresponding to Sections 147/148 of the 1961 Act), there is no real distinction between the 'issue' and 'service' of a notice. The word 'issued' must be given a wider meaning, effectively encompassing 'served'.

An assessee has not failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for assessment when the Assessing Officer had called for and received all details regarding claims, such as 100% depreciation, along with supporting invoices. A claim being unsustainable in law does not automatically amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars for penalty purposes.

Where the Assessing Officer adds 100% of bogus purchases based on an investigation report, the Tribunal can limit the addition to the profit element embedded in those purchases.

Reopening of assessment based on an audit objection is unsustainable in law. The reopening must be based on tangible reasons and not merely on an audit report.