https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783976 In limited scrutiny selected to examine share premium, the AO made an addition u/s 68 for unexplained cash credits relating to share application money. Applying the limited scrutiny regime, the ITAT held the AO exceeded jurisdiction by travelling beyond the recorded scrutiny issue; the resulting assessment was bad in law and was quashed as a nullity. Separately, the statutory notice u/s 143(2) was issued by one Assessing Officer, but the assessment was completed by another officer without a valid notice issued by the latter. As jurisdiction to frame assessment was not properly assumed, the assessment was held void ab initio and was quashed. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783976 In limited scrutiny selected to examine share premium, the AO made an addition u/s 68 for unexplained cash credits relating to share application money. Applying the limited scrutiny regime, the ITAT held the AO exceeded jurisdiction by travelling beyond the recorded scrutiny issue; the resulting assessment was bad in law and was quashed as a nullity. Separately, the statutory notice u/s 143(2) was issued by one Assessing Officer, but the assessment was completed by another officer without a valid notice issued by the latter. As jurisdiction to frame assessment was not properly assumed, the assessment was held void ab initio and was quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783976