https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768372 ITAT Mumbai held that NFAC lacked jurisdiction to decide appeals involving transfer pricing adjustments under Chapter-X of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The tribunal ruled that CIT(A) NFAC wrongly assumed jurisdiction while passing the impugned orders, despite the assessee having paid all taxes with no outstanding demand. The Revenue's challenge to improper exercise of jurisdiction by CIT(A) was upheld, and the jurisdictional issue could be raised regardless of the assessee's payment status. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:23:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768372 ITAT Mumbai held that NFAC lacked jurisdiction to decide appeals involving transfer pricing adjustments under Chapter-X of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The tribunal ruled that CIT(A) NFAC wrongly assumed jurisdiction while passing the impugned orders, despite the assessee having paid all taxes with no outstanding demand. The Revenue's challenge to improper exercise of jurisdiction by CIT(A) was upheld, and the jurisdictional issue could be raised regardless of the assessee's payment status. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768372