https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193544 The court held that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to establish whether the deductee/payee assessee had not paid taxes directly before initiating proceedings under sections 201 and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act. As a result, the court deemed the AO's assumption of jurisdiction as flawed, annulling all subsequent proceedings. The court quashed the initiation of proceedings and the assessments, emphasizing that the AO should have verified the jurisdictional fact as per the High Court ruling. Consequently, the court allowed all three appeals of the assessee, with the order issued on March 4, 2016. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Aug 2017 07:29:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193544 The court held that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to establish whether the deductee/payee assessee had not paid taxes directly before initiating proceedings under sections 201 and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act. As a result, the court deemed the AO's assumption of jurisdiction as flawed, annulling all subsequent proceedings. The court quashed the initiation of proceedings and the assessments, emphasizing that the AO should have verified the jurisdictional fact as per the High Court ruling. Consequently, the court allowed all three appeals of the assessee, with the order issued on March 4, 2016. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193544