Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
The ITAT held that the assessment framed by the ITO-2(1), Raipur under section 143(3) was without valid jurisdiction as no valid transfer order under section 127 was passed by the competent authority. The notice under section 143(2) was issued by ITO-1(1), Raipur, creating ambiguity and denying the assessee a fair opportunity to defend. The Tribunal emphasized that any ambiguity in hearing notices preventing effective defense renders the proceedings arbitrary and invalid. Consequently, the assessment order dated 28.12.2019 was quashed for lack of jurisdiction and non-compliance with statutory requirements. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that the assessment framed by the ITO-2(1), Raipur under section 143(3) was without valid jurisdiction as no valid transfer order under section 127 was passed by the competent authority. The notice under section 143(2) was issued by ITO-1(1), Raipur, creating ambiguity and denying the assessee a fair opportunity to defend. The Tribunal emphasized that any ambiguity in hearing notices preventing effective defense renders the proceedings arbitrary and invalid. Consequently, the assessment order dated 28.12.2019 was quashed for lack of jurisdiction and non-compliance with statutory requirements. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.