https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757907 The Gujarat HC ruled in favor of a Non-resident Indian petitioner challenging a notice issued under section 148A. The court held that the AO at Vapi lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice since the petitioner's address was in Andhra Pradesh, where only the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) or ITO Ward 1, Vijayanagaram had proper jurisdiction. The petitioner had provided complete bank statements showing NRE remittances from Saudi Arabia salary and FDR maturities. Since interest on NRE deposits is exempt under section 10(4), no taxable income existed requiring return filing. The reassessment proceedings were set aside due to jurisdictional invalidity. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Sep 2024 08:20:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757907 The Gujarat HC ruled in favor of a Non-resident Indian petitioner challenging a notice issued under section 148A. The court held that the AO at Vapi lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice since the petitioner's address was in Andhra Pradesh, where only the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) or ITO Ward 1, Vijayanagaram had proper jurisdiction. The petitioner had provided complete bank statements showing NRE remittances from Saudi Arabia salary and FDR maturities. Since interest on NRE deposits is exempt under section 10(4), no taxable income existed requiring return filing. The reassessment proceedings were set aside due to jurisdictional invalidity. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757907