https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61095 Valid service of a notice under section 148 was treated as the jurisdictional foundation for reassessment. Where the firm or association had been dissolved, section 283 required service only on a person who was a partner or member immediately before dissolution, or on an authorised representative. Service on Sukhdev Parshad was ineffective because his status as partner, member, or authorised agent on the relevant date was not established. Prior service in another year and a payment made by him did not prove continuing authority to receive notice. The reassessment and the consequent best-judgment assessments under section 144 were therefore without jurisdiction and void in law. en-us Wed, 26 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:59:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61095 Valid service of a notice under section 148 was treated as the jurisdictional foundation for reassessment. Where the firm or association had been dissolved, section 283 required service only on a person who was a partner or member immediately before dissolution, or on an authorised representative. Service on Sukhdev Parshad was ineffective because his status as partner, member, or authorised agent on the relevant date was not established. Prior service in another year and a payment made by him did not prove continuing authority to receive notice. The reassessment and the consequent best-judgment assessments under section 144 were therefore without jurisdiction and void in law. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61095