https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190815 The principal place of business was determined by where the persons directing the venture carried on and controlled the business, not merely where operations were performed. On the facts, Calcutta, not Cawnpore, was the principal place of business because formation, finance, contracting, banking and correspondence were centred there. Once that jurisdictional dispute arose, the Income-tax authorities were required to invoke the special procedure under section 64(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and could not assess on an unresolved assumption that Cawnpore had jurisdiction. The summary assessment made without that determination was therefore not in accordance with the Act. The cessation of the venture would not, by itself, have removed jurisdiction if Cawnpore were otherwise the proper place. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 1927 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Mar 2017 16:40:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190815 The principal place of business was determined by where the persons directing the venture carried on and controlled the business, not merely where operations were performed. On the facts, Calcutta, not Cawnpore, was the principal place of business because formation, finance, contracting, banking and correspondence were centred there. Once that jurisdictional dispute arose, the Income-tax authorities were required to invoke the special procedure under section 64(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and could not assess on an unresolved assumption that Cawnpore had jurisdiction. The summary assessment made without that determination was therefore not in accordance with the Act. The cessation of the venture would not, by itself, have removed jurisdiction if Cawnpore were otherwise the proper place. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Feb 1927 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190815