Transfer-pricing tolerance for software sub-licensing falls within the services range, eliminating the adjustment and requiring TDS-credit verificatio...
Customs Broker due diligence requires prescribed KYC, not detecting misdeclarations discoverable only through physical examination, defeating licence ...
E-filing system failure permits exclusion of affected time in insolvency appeals, preventing tribunal technology defects from defeating timely filings...
Pre-existing disputes over outcome-based professional fees can bar Section 9 insolvency proceedings where contractual entitlement requires investigati...
Corresponding scheduled offences preserve money-laundering jurisdiction despite repeal of the central corruption provision where conduct remains cover...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4886 
