Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
HC quashed the assessment order u/s 143(3) after determining AO's lack of inherent jurisdiction. The Tribunal analyzed the case facts, noting the assessee's nil income return and subsequent notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1). Relying on CBDT Instruction No.1 of 2011 and precedent in Bhagyalaxmi Conclave (P) Ltd., the Tribunal found the AO exceeded jurisdictional limits. The revenue's challenge was unsuccessful, with the HC dismissing a similar appeal involving identical substantial legal questions. Consequently, the Tribunal's order setting aside the AO's assessment was upheld, effectively deciding against the revenue on jurisdictional grounds.
HC quashed the assessment order u/s 143(3) after determining AO's lack of inherent jurisdiction. The Tribunal analyzed the case facts, noting the assessee's nil income return and subsequent notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1). Relying on CBDT Instruction No.1 of 2011 and precedent in Bhagyalaxmi Conclave (P) Ltd., the Tribunal found the AO exceeded jurisdictional limits. The revenue's challenge was unsuccessful, with the HC dismissing a similar appeal involving identical substantial legal questions. Consequently, the Tribunal's order setting aside the AO's assessment was upheld, effectively deciding against the revenue on jurisdictional grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
