Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a re-assessment notice issued by the jurisdictional AO instead of the designated Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) as required by Notification No 18/2022. The Tribunal held that the Scheme formulated by the CBDT applies to both assessment and issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It clarified that only the FAO, not the JAO, can issue notices u/s 148. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 144B applies to assessment or reassessment, not to the issuance of notices. Citing a case, the Tribunal deemed notices issued by JAOs invalid u/s 151A of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal declared the assessment based on JAO's notice as void ab initio, ruling in favor of the assessee.
The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a re-assessment notice issued by the jurisdictional AO instead of the designated Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) as required by Notification No 18/2022. The Tribunal held that the Scheme formulated by the CBDT applies to both assessment and issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It clarified that only the FAO, not the JAO, can issue notices u/s 148. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 144B applies to assessment or reassessment, not to the issuance of notices. Citing a case, the Tribunal deemed notices issued by JAOs invalid u/s 151A of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal declared the assessment based on JAO's notice as void ab initio, ruling in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
