9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (4) TMI 1158 - HC - Income TaxWrit petition - transfer of assessment records of the petitioner from Kolkata to New Delhi under section 127 of the Act - Department in its affidavit-in-opposition has not denied the fact that all along the petitioner was assessed at Kolkata. That apart, there is nothing on record to show that pursuant to an order under section 127 of the Act, the assessment records of the petitioner were transferred either from Kolkata to New Delhi or from New Delhi to Kolkata Held that - unless records were validly transferred from Kolkata to New Delhi, the said respondent had no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 for the assessment year in question, assessment proceedings under section 147 initiated by respondent No. 2 for the said assessment year, that too, is arbitrary and illegal, notices dated November 13, 2006, November 20, 2006, December 7, 2006, and the other notice dated December 7, 2006, all issued by respondent No. 3 are set aside and quashed. Hence, the writ petition is allowed
Issues:
Challenge to notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 1999-2000 based on jurisdictional grounds. Analysis: The petitioner challenged a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1999-2000 issued by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-29(3), New Delhi, arguing that without a valid transfer of assessment records from Kolkata to New Delhi under section 127 of the Act, the respondent in New Delhi lacked jurisdiction over the petitioner. The petitioner had filed the income-tax return for the assessment year 1999-2000 in Kolkata, where she was assessed by the Income-tax Officers. Despite no assessment being done on the return, the petitioner received the impugned notice under section 148 in 2006, alleging that her income had escaped assessment. The petitioner contended that the subsequent notices issued were also without jurisdiction, being linked to the initial notice under section 148. The High Court observed that the Department did not refute the petitioner's assessment history in Kolkata, nor was there evidence of a valid transfer of assessment records between Kolkata and New Delhi. Consequently, the Court held that the notice under section 148 issued by the respondent in New Delhi was arbitrary, lacking jurisdiction, and illegal. The subsequent notices, including those under sections 142 and 143(2), were deemed illegal as they were connected to the initial notice under section 148. The Court set aside and quashed all notices issued by the respondent in New Delhi, ruling in favor of the petitioner. The judgment highlighted the importance of jurisdictional requirements under the Income-tax Act and emphasized the need for valid transfers of assessment records for jurisdictional purposes. The Court's decision focused on upholding the principles of jurisdictional authority under the Income-tax Act, ensuring that proper procedures and transfers of assessment records are adhered to before assuming jurisdiction over a taxpayer. By declaring the notices issued by the respondent in New Delhi as arbitrary and illegal due to lack of jurisdiction, the Court provided a significant ruling in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of jurisdictional clarity in tax assessment proceedings.
|
