Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Reassessment proceedings were held invalid due to lack of proper jurisdiction by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax while issuing the notice u/s 148. The assessment order was not passed by the person issuing the notice, rendering it a curable defect u/s 292BB. The ACIT lacked pecuniary jurisdiction as the assessee's total income for the relevant assessment year fell within the Income Tax Officer's jurisdiction. The subsequent transfer of assessment records by the ACIT to the ITO was deemed illegal, as transfers can only be done u/s 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The defect was deemed incurable and not amenable to correction u/s 292BB. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 148 was without jurisdiction, and the consequent assessment order was held invalid. The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, aligning with the Bombay High Court's judgment in Ashok Devichand Jain v. Union of India & Ors.
Reassessment proceedings were held invalid due to lack of proper jurisdiction by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax while issuing the notice u/s 148. The assessment order was not passed by the person issuing the notice, rendering it a curable defect u/s 292BB. The ACIT lacked pecuniary jurisdiction as the assessee's total income for the relevant assessment year fell within the Income Tax Officer's jurisdiction. The subsequent transfer of assessment records by the ACIT to the ITO was deemed illegal, as transfers can only be done u/s 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The defect was deemed incurable and not amenable to correction u/s 292BB. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 148 was without jurisdiction, and the consequent assessment order was held invalid. The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, aligning with the Bombay High Court's judgment in Ashok Devichand Jain v. Union of India & Ors.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
