Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
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.