COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Section 153C jurisdiction requires timely deemed search and assessee-specific satisfaction material; otherwise reassessment must use the proper statut...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
681 to 700 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
