Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The ITAT held that the assumption of jurisdiction by the Range head (Addl. CIT, Range-1, Raipur) to perform Assessing Officer functions under section 2(7A) without an order under section 120(4)(b) was invalid. The tribunal found no legal basis for the range head's jurisdiction, referencing the Jindal Power Ltd. case. The revenue's reliance on CBDT instructions and Notification No. 6/2009 was rejected as insufficient to confer legitimate jurisdictional authority. Consequently, the assessment order dated 03.02.2014 framed under section 144 was quashed due to lack of inherent jurisdictional competence.
The ITAT held that the assumption of jurisdiction by the Range head (Addl. CIT, Range-1, Raipur) to perform Assessing Officer functions under section 2(7A) without an order under section 120(4)(b) was invalid. The tribunal found no legal basis for the range head's jurisdiction, referencing the Jindal Power Ltd. case. The revenue's reliance on CBDT instructions and Notification No. 6/2009 was rejected as insufficient to confer legitimate jurisdictional authority. Consequently, the assessment order dated 03.02.2014 framed under section 144 was quashed due to lack of inherent jurisdictional competence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
