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...
The court held that the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment, as per Section 151A read with the Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. This provision mandates that such notices be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Relying on the Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the court concluded that the impugned notices issued by the JAO were illegal and invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. Consequently, the court allowed the petition in favor of the assessee, quashing the reassessment notices.
The court held that the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment, as per Section 151A read with the Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. This provision mandates that such notices be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Relying on the Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the court concluded that the impugned notices issued by the JAO were illegal and invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. Consequently, the court allowed the petition in favor of the assessee, quashing the reassessment notices.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.