Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Issue of faceless assessment of income escaping assessment, where the notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), as required by Section 151A. The High Court held that for a valid reassessment notice u/s 148, the Revenue must comply with Section 151A, as interpreted in the cases of Hexaware Technologies Limited and Nainraj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. The Court ruled that the JAO is not permitted to issue a notice u/s 148, as it would breach Section 151A. There is no concurrent jurisdiction between the JAO and FAO for issuing notices u/s 148 or passing assessment/reassessment orders. Accepting the Revenue's argument would lead to chaos and render faceless proceedings redundant. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Issue of faceless assessment of income escaping assessment, where the notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), as required by Section 151A. The High Court held that for a valid reassessment notice u/s 148, the Revenue must comply with Section 151A, as interpreted in the cases of Hexaware Technologies Limited and Nainraj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. The Court ruled that the JAO is not permitted to issue a notice u/s 148, as it would breach Section 151A. There is no concurrent jurisdiction between the JAO and FAO for issuing notices u/s 148 or passing assessment/reassessment orders. Accepting the Revenue's argument would lead to chaos and render faceless proceedings redundant. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.