<?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>Automated allocation governs reassessment notices, while retrospective validation cannot override unamended faceless jurisdictional requirements under the statutory scheme.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104754</link>
    <description>Section 151A and the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 require randomised automated allocation for reassessment functions, including the section 148A process and issuance of section 148 notices. General concurrent-jurisdiction directions cannot permit a jurisdictional Assessing Officer to bypass the prescribed faceless allocation, because allocation determines the officer&#039;s statutory competence. Risk-based selection of a matter is distinct from algorithmic allocation of the officer. Section 147A&#039;s retrospective deeming rule was held unconstitutional because it did not amend the continuing statutory and scheme-based requirements for automated allocation, and therefore did not remove the legal foundation of prior jurisdictional rulings. Administrative instructions cannot override the Act or a valid notified scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:53:18 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:53:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Automated allocation governs reassessment notices, while retrospective validation cannot override unamended faceless jurisdictional requirements under the statutory scheme.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104754</link>
      <description>Section 151A and the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 require randomised automated allocation for reassessment functions, including the section 148A process and issuance of section 148 notices. General concurrent-jurisdiction directions cannot permit a jurisdictional Assessing Officer to bypass the prescribed faceless allocation, because allocation determines the officer&#039;s statutory competence. Risk-based selection of a matter is distinct from algorithmic allocation of the officer. Section 147A&#039;s retrospective deeming rule was held unconstitutional because it did not amend the continuing statutory and scheme-based requirements for automated allocation, and therefore did not remove the legal foundation of prior jurisdictional rulings. Administrative instructions cannot override the Act or a valid notified scheme.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:53:18 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104754</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>