Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defec...
Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment applicati...
Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of mate...
Revisability of return invalidation communications under tax procedure affirmed, impugned non revisional finding quashed and matter remitted for fresh...
Validity of assessment proceedings under faceless assessment...
Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural unfairness.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Validity of assessment proceedings under faceless assessment rules is challenged where a jurisdictional assessing officer intervened during remand, causing procedural irregularity and violation of principles of natural justice; the intervention by the jurisdictional AO was unnecessary and rendered the hearing futile, and a one-day opportunity to reply was held inadequate, resulting in quashing of the impugned assessment order dated 10.12.2024. The decision underscores that remand directions must be adhered to, that change of AO mid-proceedings can vitiate the process if it breaches procedural fairness, and that adequate opportunity to be heard is mandatory.
Validity of assessment proceedings under faceless assessment rules is challenged where a jurisdictional assessing officer intervened during remand, causing procedural irregularity and violation of principles of natural justice; the intervention by the jurisdictional AO was unnecessary and rendered the hearing futile, and a one-day opportunity to reply was held inadequate, resulting in quashing of the impugned assessment order dated 10.12.2024. The decision underscores that remand directions must be adhered to, that change of AO mid-proceedings can vitiate the process if it breaches procedural fairness, and that adequate opportunity to be heard is mandatory.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
