Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011, metro corporate returns up to the prescribed income limit remained with the ITO, while only higher-value cases fell within ACIT/DCIT jurisdiction. Because the assessee's returned income and income assessed under section 143(3) were both below that limit, the ACIT lacked monetary jurisdiction to issue the section 148 notice. The Tribunal treated this defect as going to the validity of the jurisdictional notice itself, held the notice invalid, and quashed the reassessment order as consequentially unsustainable.
Under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011, metro corporate returns up to the prescribed income limit remained with the ITO, while only higher-value cases fell within ACIT/DCIT jurisdiction. Because the assessee's returned income and income assessed under section 143(3) were both below that limit, the ACIT lacked monetary jurisdiction to issue the section 148 notice. The Tribunal treated this defect as going to the validity of the jurisdictional notice itself, held the notice invalid, and quashed the reassessment order as consequentially unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.