https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26680 Service of notice under section 269D(2) before publication in the Official Gazette was held not to vitiate jurisdiction or invalidate the acquisition order, as the objection was governed by earlier controlling reasoning. The binding CBDT circular, however, had to be followed in light of pending applications under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act, 1976. Because that later statutory development could affect the acquisition process, the appellate and acquisition orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after the Commissioner's decision, in accordance with the circular. The challenge to the validity of Chapter XX-A and the rejected jurisdictional objection could not be reopened. en-us Mon, 18 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Feb 2010 17:19:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26680 Service of notice under section 269D(2) before publication in the Official Gazette was held not to vitiate jurisdiction or invalidate the acquisition order, as the objection was governed by earlier controlling reasoning. The binding CBDT circular, however, had to be followed in light of pending applications under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act, 1976. Because that later statutory development could affect the acquisition process, the appellate and acquisition orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after the Commissioner's decision, in accordance with the circular. The challenge to the validity of Chapter XX-A and the rejected jurisdictional objection could not be reopened. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26680