https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181755 Valid service of the section 34 notice was a jurisdictional precondition for reassessment. The HC noted that service had to comply with section 63 of the Income-tax Act and the applicable Order V CPC rules, requiring personal service where practicable and permitting affixture only after due and reasonable diligence and proper verification. The service reports did not establish those requirements, so substituted service by affixture lacked a proper foundation. A later reference to the notice by the assessee did not cure the defect or create a presumption of valid prior service. The reassessment proceedings were therefore without jurisdiction and invalid. en-us Mon, 26 Feb 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Apr 2016 15:38:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181755 Valid service of the section 34 notice was a jurisdictional precondition for reassessment. The HC noted that service had to comply with section 63 of the Income-tax Act and the applicable Order V CPC rules, requiring personal service where practicable and permitting affixture only after due and reasonable diligence and proper verification. The service reports did not establish those requirements, so substituted service by affixture lacked a proper foundation. A later reference to the notice by the assessee did not cure the defect or create a presumption of valid prior service. The reassessment proceedings were therefore without jurisdiction and invalid. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Feb 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181755