The ITAT held that the assessee's belated challenge to the AO's jurisdiction under s.124 was not maintainable, as no objection was raised before the AO or CIT(A) within the statutory framework of s.124(3). Section 124 was treated as a self-contained code, and the additional ground on jurisdiction was dismissed. However, on the issue of addition towards alleged long-term capital gains, the ITAT found procedural infirmity because the CIT(A) relied on the AO's remand report without granting the assessee an opportunity to rebut it. In the interest of justice, the matter on capital gains was remanded to the jurisdictional AO for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.
The ITAT held that the assessee's belated challenge to the AO's jurisdiction under s.124 was not maintainable, as no objection was raised before the AO or CIT(A) within the statutory framework of s.124(3). Section 124 was treated as a self-contained code, and the additional ground on jurisdiction was dismissed. However, on the issue of addition towards alleged long-term capital gains, the ITAT found procedural infirmity because the CIT(A) relied on the AO's remand report without granting the assessee an opportunity to rebut it. In the interest of justice, the matter on capital gains was remanded to the jurisdictional AO for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
