Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
