https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200601 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the reopening of the assessment for the A.Y. 2001-2002. It confirmed that the jurisdiction lies with the JCIT, Kurnool, not with the DDIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad. The Tribunal emphasized consistency in its rulings based on earlier decisions in the assessee's case for other assessment years. The treatment of the development fund as capitation fee and its exemption under section 11 was not extensively addressed in this judgment, with the primary focus being on jurisdiction and the validity of the assessment reopening. en-us Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Apr 2018 21:07:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200601 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the reopening of the assessment for the A.Y. 2001-2002. It confirmed that the jurisdiction lies with the JCIT, Kurnool, not with the DDIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad. The Tribunal emphasized consistency in its rulings based on earlier decisions in the assessee's case for other assessment years. The treatment of the development fund as capitation fee and its exemption under section 11 was not extensively addressed in this judgment, with the primary focus being on jurisdiction and the validity of the assessment reopening. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200601