Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
Transfer of jurisdiction from Faridabad to Delhi was held invalid because the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the transfer order was made. Notices under section 143(2) issued by Delhi officers were therefore treated as without valid jurisdiction and ineffective for the assessment year concerned. After the transfer order was cancelled, jurisdiction reverted to the original Assessing Officer at Faridabad, but that officer also completed the assessment without first issuing a valid section 143(2) notice. The assessment was consequently quashed for a foundational jurisdictional defect, and the merits were left undecided.
Transfer of jurisdiction from Faridabad to Delhi was held invalid because the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the transfer order was made. Notices under section 143(2) issued by Delhi officers were therefore treated as without valid jurisdiction and ineffective for the assessment year concerned. After the transfer order was cancelled, jurisdiction reverted to the original Assessing Officer at Faridabad, but that officer also completed the assessment without first issuing a valid section 143(2) notice. The assessment was consequently quashed for a foundational jurisdictional defect, and the merits were left undecided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
