https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49324 Challenge to a tax notice under Section 34(1)(a) concerns whether the assessing officer had jurisdiction because the taxpayer allegedly disclosed all material facts; where a petitioner on oath prima facie alleges absence of the jurisdictional conditions, the High Court should not dismiss the petition in limine without giving the tax authority an opportunity to meet the allegations. The court directs that considerations such as delay, acquiescence, adequacy of alternative remedies and whether disputed factual questions require trial must be addressed; because the petition warranted enquiry, the matter is remanded for issuance of rule and trial. en-us Thu, 08 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49324 Challenge to a tax notice under Section 34(1)(a) concerns whether the assessing officer had jurisdiction because the taxpayer allegedly disclosed all material facts; where a petitioner on oath prima facie alleges absence of the jurisdictional conditions, the High Court should not dismiss the petition in limine without giving the tax authority an opportunity to meet the allegations. The court directs that considerations such as delay, acquiescence, adequacy of alternative remedies and whether disputed factual questions require trial must be addressed; because the petition warranted enquiry, the matter is remanded for issuance of rule and trial. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49324