Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2541 to 2560 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
