2023 (10) TMI 647 - AT - Income Tax

Territorial Jurisdiction - Transfer of Jurisdiction u/s 127 - Order was challenged on this ground earlier - As submitted AO has to be first vested with appropriate jurisdiction in terms of section 120(1) and (2) which is not so in the present case, since an order u/s 127 had already been passed transferring the jurisdiction from Kolkata to New Delhi, AO in the present case was divested of the jurisdiction to pass the impugned order - HELD THAT - Admittedly, it is a fact on record that jurisdiction was transferred vide order under Section 127 and the revisionary proceedings under Section 263 and assessment giving effect to the same were of undertaken thereafter by the officer of erstwhile jurisdiction. The chronology of events tabulated above, supported by documentary evidences placed on record and well reasoned finding given by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) persuades us unhesitatingly to uphold the order of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), whereby, the impugned assessment order has been quashed owing to lack of jurisdiction. In respect of reliance placed by the learned CIT (DR) on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shyam Sunder Infra-structure Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (2) TMI 410 - DELHI HIGH COURT we note that there is no mention about passing of any order under Section 127 of the Act, hence, is distinguishable on facts. Accordingly, grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the jurisdiction assumed by the authorities below in an appeal against the assessment order passed under Sections 144/263/143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2009-10.

Jurisdiction Issue:
The sole issue in this appeal pertains to the jurisdiction assumed by the authorities below. The case involved the transfer of jurisdiction from Kolkata to New Delhi and subsequent assessment proceedings conducted by the officer of the erstwhile jurisdiction.

Facts:
The case involved the filing of the return of income, reopening under Section 148, and completion of assessment under Section 147 read with Section 143(3). The jurisdiction was transferred from Kolkata to New Delhi under Section 127(2), followed by revisionary proceedings under Section 263 and the assessment order passed under Sections 144/263/143(3)/147.

Assessee's Contentions:
The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. The chronological events and documentary evidence supported the claim that the assessment order was passed without valid jurisdiction.

Commissioner's Findings:
The Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) quashed the assessment order, citing the lack of valid jurisdiction. The order under Section 127 transferring jurisdiction was not reverted, and the proceedings should have been transferred to the appropriate jurisdiction as per the law.

Tribunal's Decision:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, emphasizing the transfer of jurisdiction and subsequent proceedings conducted by the officer of the erstwhile jurisdiction. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, noting the lack of jurisdiction and distinguishing the case cited by the Revenue.

This summary provides a detailed overview of the jurisdictional issue and the findings of the authorities involved in the legal judgment.