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...
The HC quashed the notice issued u/s 143(2) by the JAO for AY 2023-24, holding that the JAO lacked jurisdiction. As per section 144B(1)(iii), for scrutiny assessment under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, the notice u/s 143(2) is to be issued by the NFAC, not the JAO. The JAO can issue such notice only where notice u/s 148 has already been issued for that AY, which was not the case here. Mere approval from the Pr. CIT cannot confer jurisdiction on the JAO to issue the impugned notice.
The HC quashed the notice issued u/s 143(2) by the JAO for AY 2023-24, holding that the JAO lacked jurisdiction. As per section 144B(1)(iii), for scrutiny assessment under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, the notice u/s 143(2) is to be issued by the NFAC, not the JAO. The JAO can issue such notice only where notice u/s 148 has already been issued for that AY, which was not the case here. Mere approval from the Pr. CIT cannot confer jurisdiction on the JAO to issue the impugned notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
