Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1641 to 1660 of 96508 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CBDT Instruction No. 1 of 2011 issued under section 119 was held to govern pecuniary jurisdiction for issuance of notice under section 143(2). As the assessee's declared income fell below the limit placing jurisdiction with the Income Tax Officer in a metro city, the ACIT lacked competent pecuniary jurisdiction to assume assessment jurisdiction under section 143(3). The defect was treated as a foundational jurisdictional error, not a mere issue of concurrent jurisdiction. The Tribunal distinguished the Revenue's reliance on a different High Court ruling concerning search-related and territorial jurisdiction. The assessment was therefore vitiated and quashed, and the assessee's additional ground was allowed.
CBDT Instruction No. 1 of 2011 issued under section 119 was held to govern pecuniary jurisdiction for issuance of notice under section 143(2). As the assessee's declared income fell below the limit placing jurisdiction with the Income Tax Officer in a metro city, the ACIT lacked competent pecuniary jurisdiction to assume assessment jurisdiction under section 143(3). The defect was treated as a foundational jurisdictional error, not a mere issue of concurrent jurisdiction. The Tribunal distinguished the Revenue's reliance on a different High Court ruling concerning search-related and territorial jurisdiction. The assessment was therefore vitiated and quashed, and the assessee's additional ground was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
