Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
ITAT held that the assessment proceedings were invalid for want of jurisdiction. Jurisdictional notices under s.143(2) were issued by ITO Ward 39(4) and the file was subsequently treated as transferred to ITO Ward 36(4) and finally ITO Ward 36(6) without any valid order under s.127(1); consequently the transferee AO did not acquire jurisdiction to complete assessment. The tribunal concluded that the AO in ITO Ward 36(6) lacked authority to pass the assessment order, quashed the entire proceedings and allowed the grounds raised by the assessee.
ITAT held that the assessment proceedings were invalid for want of jurisdiction. Jurisdictional notices under s.143(2) were issued by ITO Ward 39(4) and the file was subsequently treated as transferred to ITO Ward 36(4) and finally ITO Ward 36(6) without any valid order under s.127(1); consequently the transferee AO did not acquire jurisdiction to complete assessment. The tribunal concluded that the AO in ITO Ward 36(6) lacked authority to pass the assessment order, quashed the entire proceedings and allowed the grounds raised by the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
