<?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>2026 (9) TMI 2035 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800009</link>
    <description>Jurisdictional notice issued by an officer lacking pecuniary jurisdiction under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 constituted an inherent illegality. For non-corporate assessees with returned income up to the prescribed threshold, jurisdiction lay with an Income-tax Officer. Territorial-jurisdiction objections under section 124(3) did not preclude a challenge to pecuniary jurisdiction, and section 292BB could not cure the defect. The notice and consequential assessment were void ab initio.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2026 08:41:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=927102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 2035 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800009</link>
      <description>Jurisdictional notice issued by an officer lacking pecuniary jurisdiction under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 constituted an inherent illegality. For non-corporate assessees with returned income up to the prescribed threshold, jurisdiction lay with an Income-tax Officer. Territorial-jurisdiction objections under section 124(3) did not preclude a challenge to pecuniary jurisdiction, and section 292BB could not cure the defect. The notice and consequential assessment were void ab initio.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800009</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>