9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 385 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - assuming the jurisdiction by the AO after transferring the case to the different AO - HELD THAT - Original return was field by the assessee on 30.10.2007 with the aforesaid ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi. It is further not in dispute that on 30.10.2007 the return was also processed in the jurisdiction of ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi, u/s 143(1) - no valid order by any Competent Authority was in existence on 31.03.2014 transferring the jurisdiction of the assessee from ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi to ITO, Ward-24(3), New Delhi. In any case, by transferring the assessment records of the assessee to Circle-33(1), New Delhi on 19.08.2014 the aforesaid ITO, Ward-24(3), New Delhi has already, by necessary implication, admitted in effect that the jurisdiction over the assessee did not vest in Ward-24(3), New Delhi. ITO, Ward-24(3), New Delhi lacked jurisdiction to issue aforesaid notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2014 for initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. If an Assessing Officer issued a notice to an assessee u/s 148 of the Act for initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, without having jurisdiction over the assessee; such a notice is void ab initio, and an assessment order passed in consequence thereof is non est, devoid of any legal force. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in issuing the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Validity of the proceedings under Section 147 and the consequential assessment order. 3. Addition of ?66,50,000 under Section 68 based on suspicion and surmises. 4. Rejection of the confirmation letter affidavit without examining the individual who presented it. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in Issuing Notice under Section 148 The assessee contended that the jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act vested with ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi, not ITO, Ward-24(3), New Delhi. The original return was filed with ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi, and no valid order transferring jurisdiction to Ward-24(3) existed on 31.03.2014. The Tribunal found that the jurisdiction indeed vested with ITO, Ward-33(4), and the transfer of assessment records to Circle-33(1) on 19.08.2014 implied that Ward-24(3) did not have jurisdiction. Consequently, the notice issued under Section 148 by ITO, Ward-24(3), was deemed void ab initio, rendering the assessment order non est and devoid of legal force. Issue 2: Validity of the Proceedings under Section 147 and the Consequential Assessment Order The Tribunal noted that the proceedings initiated under Section 147 based on the notice issued by ITO, Ward-24(3), were invalid due to the lack of jurisdiction. This was supported by precedents, including the Delhi High Court's ruling in Dushyant Kumar Jain vs. DCIT, which emphasized that only the Assessing Officer who issued the original assessment order could exercise powers under Sections 147/148. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the notice dated 31.03.2014 and annulled the assessment order dated 30.03.2015. Issue 3: Addition of ?66,50,000 under Section 68 Based on Suspicion and Surmises Given the Tribunal's decision to quash the notice and annul the assessment order, the issue of the addition of ?66,50,000 under Section 68 became academic. Consequently, the Tribunal did not adjudicate on this ground. Issue 4: Rejection of the Confirmation Letter Affidavit Without Examining the Individual Similarly, the Tribunal did not address the issue regarding the rejection of the confirmation letter affidavit, as it was rendered moot by the annulment of the assessment order. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the notice under Section 148 and annulling the assessment order. The remaining grounds were not adjudicated due to the primary decision on jurisdiction. The order was pronounced on 06th September 2019.
|
