https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779868 HC held that challenge to AO's territorial jurisdiction was barred by Section 124(3)(a) of the IT Act because the assessee failed to object within one month of service of notice under s.143(2) or before completion of assessment. Notice served on 21-8-2013 and no jurisdictional objection was raised until CIT(A) decision; reassignment of wards by notification later validly conferred jurisdiction on the ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur. Consequently the ITAT rightly declined to entertain the jurisdictional plea and the substantial question of law was answered against the assessee. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:39:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779868 HC held that challenge to AO's territorial jurisdiction was barred by Section 124(3)(a) of the IT Act because the assessee failed to object within one month of service of notice under s.143(2) or before completion of assessment. Notice served on 21-8-2013 and no jurisdictional objection was raised until CIT(A) decision; reassignment of wards by notification later validly conferred jurisdiction on the ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur. Consequently the ITAT rightly declined to entertain the jurisdictional plea and the substantial question of law was answered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779868