Jurisdiction under Black Money Act: unauthorized notices and summonses were set aside, with liberty to proceed through the competent authority.

A jurisdictional challenge arose to notices and summonses issued under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. The counter-affidavit recorded that, in view of the CBDT notification, the respondent was not the competent authority to initiate proceedings, rendering the impugned action void ab initio, and that notices had already been issued by the competent authority. The Madras HC therefore set aside the impugned notices and summonses, while preserving liberty to proceed on the basis of the notices issued by the competent authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned notices and summonses issued by the respondent under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 were liable to be quashed for want of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The counter-affidavit stated that, in view of the CBDT notification, the respondent was not the competent authority to issue notice and proceed under the Act, and that the proceedings were therefore void ab initio and infructuous. The competent authority had already issued notices to the petitioners.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were allowed and the impugned notices and summonses issued by the respondent were set aside, while leaving liberty to proceed in accordance with the notices issued by the competent authority.

---