Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Faceless assessment provisions u/s 151A require notice u/s 148 for income escaping assessment to be issued by Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), not Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). Court held JAO lacks jurisdiction to issue Section 148 notice, as it would breach Section 151A. FAO and JAO cannot have concurrent jurisdiction for issuing Section 148 notice or passing assessment/reassessment orders, as specific jurisdiction is assigned to either FAO or JAO under faceless assessment scheme, excluding the other. Allowing concurrent jurisdiction would render faceless proceedings redundant and create chaos. Since JAO admittedly lacked jurisdiction, the writ petition challenging Section 148 notice issued by JAO was allowed.
Faceless assessment provisions u/s 151A require notice u/s 148 for income escaping assessment to be issued by Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), not Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). Court held JAO lacks jurisdiction to issue Section 148 notice, as it would breach Section 151A. FAO and JAO cannot have concurrent jurisdiction for issuing Section 148 notice or passing assessment/reassessment orders, as specific jurisdiction is assigned to either FAO or JAO under faceless assessment scheme, excluding the other. Allowing concurrent jurisdiction would render faceless proceedings redundant and create chaos. Since JAO admittedly lacked jurisdiction, the writ petition challenging Section 148 notice issued by JAO was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
