https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420865 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) improperly assumed jurisdiction for reopening the assessment due to the invalid service of the notice under section 148. The A.O. failed to exercise due diligence in verifying the correct address, rendering the service of notice by affixture at the wrong address invalid. As a result, the reassessment proceedings were deemed invalid. The matter was remanded to the A.O. to address any objections raised by the assessee regarding the notice service. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:16:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420865 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) improperly assumed jurisdiction for reopening the assessment due to the invalid service of the notice under section 148. The A.O. failed to exercise due diligence in verifying the correct address, rendering the service of notice by affixture at the wrong address invalid. As a result, the reassessment proceedings were deemed invalid. The matter was remanded to the A.O. to address any objections raised by the assessee regarding the notice service. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420865