https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7858 Delay and laches did not bar the writ because the challenge was brought at the earliest practical stage, the petitioner kept contesting jurisdiction, and no prejudice to the revenue was shown. Reassessment notices issued to the petitioner as legal representative of a deceased person could not support reassessment of the Hindu undivided family's income, because an individual and an HUF are distinct assessment units and a notice under section 34 is the jurisdictional foundation. Notices directed to the wrong assessee, and unsupported by matching sanction, were invalid and were quashed. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7858 Delay and laches did not bar the writ because the challenge was brought at the earliest practical stage, the petitioner kept contesting jurisdiction, and no prejudice to the revenue was shown. Reassessment notices issued to the petitioner as legal representative of a deceased person could not support reassessment of the Hindu undivided family's income, because an individual and an HUF are distinct assessment units and a notice under section 34 is the jurisdictional foundation. Notices directed to the wrong assessee, and unsupported by matching sanction, were invalid and were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Apr 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7858