Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
The ITAT held that jurisdiction to issue notice under section 143(2) and to frame assessment under section 143(3) lies exclusively with the DCIT/ACIT of Income Tax 1(1), Raipur, and not with the ITO, Ward 1(4). The assessment framed by the ITO, Ward 1(4), was therefore without jurisdiction, rendering it void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment order dated 28.12.2017 was quashed. Since the assessment was invalid, all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were declared non est in law. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, emphasizing that any exercise of power imposing financial liability must be within the legally prescribed jurisdiction to be valid.
The ITAT held that jurisdiction to issue notice under section 143(2) and to frame assessment under section 143(3) lies exclusively with the DCIT/ACIT of Income Tax 1(1), Raipur, and not with the ITO, Ward 1(4). The assessment framed by the ITO, Ward 1(4), was therefore without jurisdiction, rendering it void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment order dated 28.12.2017 was quashed. Since the assessment was invalid, all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were declared non est in law. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, emphasizing that any exercise of power imposing financial liability must be within the legally prescribed jurisdiction to be valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
