Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
