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...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
