Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held that either the AO or the prescribed authority can issue such notices, as evident from the expression "as the case may be" in Section 143(2). The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is empowered u/r 12E of the Income Tax Rules to authorize an Income Tax Officer as the prescribed authority for issuing notices u/s 143(2). In the present case, the CBDT had authorized the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi, to act as the prescribed authority. Therefore, the notice issued by this officer u/s 143(2) was valid and within jurisdiction. The contention that only National Faceless Assessment Centre officers can issue such notices was rejected as unsupported by the provisions. The prescribed authority can issue, not merely serve, notices u/s 143(2). Once the jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 143(2) is established, the AO cannot be faulted for completing the assessment.
The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held that either the AO or the prescribed authority can issue such notices, as evident from the expression "as the case may be" in Section 143(2). The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is empowered u/r 12E of the Income Tax Rules to authorize an Income Tax Officer as the prescribed authority for issuing notices u/s 143(2). In the present case, the CBDT had authorized the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi, to act as the prescribed authority. Therefore, the notice issued by this officer u/s 143(2) was valid and within jurisdiction. The contention that only National Faceless Assessment Centre officers can issue such notices was rejected as unsupported by the provisions. The prescribed authority can issue, not merely serve, notices u/s 143(2). Once the jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 143(2) is established, the AO cannot be faulted for completing the assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
