Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
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.