Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC upheld that the assessee's challenge to the territorial jurisdiction of the AO was barred by Section 124(3)(a) of the IT Act because no objection was raised within the statutory period or prior to completion of assessment; notice under s.143(2) served on the PAN address did not revive the objection. The court further held that subsequent administrative reallocation of wards lawfully vested jurisdiction in ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur, rendering the jurisdictional plea untimely and without merit. Consequently, the ITAT's refusal to entertain the jurisdictional challenge was affirmed and the substantial question of law was answered against the assessee.
The HC upheld that the assessee's challenge to the territorial jurisdiction of the AO was barred by Section 124(3)(a) of the IT Act because no objection was raised within the statutory period or prior to completion of assessment; notice under s.143(2) served on the PAN address did not revive the objection. The court further held that subsequent administrative reallocation of wards lawfully vested jurisdiction in ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur, rendering the jurisdictional plea untimely and without merit. Consequently, the ITAT's refusal to entertain the jurisdictional challenge was affirmed and the substantial question of law was answered against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
