https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789336 Reassessment was held invalid on jurisdictional grounds at both stages. First, the reopening notice issued by the Income-tax Officer was beyond the officer's jurisdiction because the assessee's returned income fell above the allocation threshold under the applicable CBDT instruction, so the reassessment could not lawfully commence. Second, the reassessment order was passed by the NFAC before the relevant e-assessment notification had become operative, meaning the forum used for completion had not yet been legally empowered. Each defect independently went to the root of the proceedings, rendering the reassessment void ab initio and the matter decided in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789336 Reassessment was held invalid on jurisdictional grounds at both stages. First, the reopening notice issued by the Income-tax Officer was beyond the officer's jurisdiction because the assessee's returned income fell above the allocation threshold under the applicable CBDT instruction, so the reassessment could not lawfully commence. Second, the reassessment order was passed by the NFAC before the relevant e-assessment notification had become operative, meaning the forum used for completion had not yet been legally empowered. Each defect independently went to the root of the proceedings, rendering the reassessment void ab initio and the matter decided in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789336