Income Tax : Tribunal held that an assessment is void when the competent officer does not issue the mandatory notice. Jurisdiction cannot arise...
Income Tax : Understand the three core processes of Indian Income Tax: Rectification of mistakes (Sec 154), the four types of Assessment (Summa...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held the assessment invalid as no mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was issued. The key takeaway is that absence ...
Income Tax : ITAT held that reassessment without issuing notice under Section 143(2) is invalid, even if return was filed late. The ruling emph...
Income Tax : Despite disputes over agricultural income additions, the Tribunal focused on the legality of the proceedings. It held that issuing...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that reassessment proceedings initiated against a dead person are void in law. A valid notice must be issued to...
Income Tax : While deleting the interest disallowance on merits, the Tribunal remanded the brought-forward loss issue for limited verification....
The Tribunal held the assessment invalid as no mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was issued. The key takeaway is that absence of such notice renders the entire assessment void.
ITAT held that reassessment without issuing notice under Section 143(2) is invalid, even if return was filed late. The ruling emphasizes that issuance of notice is mandatory and absence of it makes the assessment void.
Despite disputes over agricultural income additions, the Tribunal focused on the legality of the proceedings. It held that issuing a notice to a deceased taxpayer is a substantive illegality and cannot be treated as a curable procedural defect. The assessment was quashed.
The Tribunal ruled that reassessment proceedings initiated against a dead person are void in law. A valid notice must be issued to the legal heirs under Section 159 before initiating reassessment.
While deleting the interest disallowance on merits, the Tribunal remanded the brought-forward loss issue for limited verification. Other legal grounds were treated as academic.
The ITAT held that absence of a valid notice under Section 143(2) is a jurisdictional defect. Since the notice was not properly issued by the competent officer, the entire assessment was declared void ab initio.
The Tribunal held that statutory jurisdiction must be strictly followed in income-tax proceedings. In absence of proof of transfer to the assessing ward, the assessment was declared invalid and set aside.
The Tribunal emphasized that approval from the correct specified authority is mandatory where reopening exceeds three years. Failure to comply rendered the reassessment proceedings void ab initio.
The tribunal ruled that reassessment beyond four years is barred when reasons do not allege failure to disclose material facts. Mere suspicion of escaped income is insufficient to override the statutory limitation.
Tribunal held that an assessment is void when the competent officer does not issue the mandatory notice. Jurisdiction cannot arise without a valid section 143(2) notice.
