Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
The dispute concerns validity of an assessment order issued by an Assessing Officer who lacked jurisdiction due to multiple transfers of PAN jurisdiction; absence of any transfer order under the relevant statutory power prior to assessment meant jurisdiction remained with the original ITO. The tribunal applied the principle that an order by a non jurisdictional Assessing Officer is void ab initio and that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by the assessee's participation; accordingly the assessment was held void and the appellate order upholding it could not stand, appeal allowed.
The dispute concerns validity of an assessment order issued by an Assessing Officer who lacked jurisdiction due to multiple transfers of PAN jurisdiction; absence of any transfer order under the relevant statutory power prior to assessment meant jurisdiction remained with the original ITO. The tribunal applied the principle that an order by a non jurisdictional Assessing Officer is void ab initio and that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by the assessee's participation; accordingly the assessment was held void and the appellate order upholding it could not stand, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
