Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
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.