<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Notice under s.148 issued by wrong officer is void for lack of jurisdiction; consent or prior acquiescence cannot cure it</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92879</link>
    <description>The HC held that a notice issued under s.148 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer was void for want of jurisdiction where the statute mandates issuance by the FAO; this inherent lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by consent or by the assessee&#039;s prior abandonment of challenge. The Court applied the principle that statutory powers must be exercised by the authority designated by statute, and any exercise inconsistent with statutory prescription is a nullity. Consequently, the petitioner&#039;s writ challenging the s.148 notice was maintainable despite earlier acquiescence, and the impugned notice (and any consequential action) was declared invalid, decision rendered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:26:58 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=854731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Notice under s.148 issued by wrong officer is void for lack of jurisdiction; consent or prior acquiescence cannot cure it</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92879</link>
      <description>The HC held that a notice issued under s.148 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer was void for want of jurisdiction where the statute mandates issuance by the FAO; this inherent lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by consent or by the assessee&#039;s prior abandonment of challenge. The Court applied the principle that statutory powers must be exercised by the authority designated by statute, and any exercise inconsistent with statutory prescription is a nullity. Consequently, the petitioner&#039;s writ challenging the s.148 notice was maintainable despite earlier acquiescence, and the impugned notice (and any consequential action) was declared invalid, decision rendered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:26:58 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>