9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to jurisdiction u/s 147/148 of the Act and validity of impugned order.
Summary: The cross-appeals were filed against the order of the CIT(A)-I, Bikaner. The assessee sought permission to raise an additional ground challenging the jurisdiction under s. 147/148 of the Act. The reassessment was initially made on 31st March, 2004, and subsequently set aside for fresh assessment. The reassessment was completed on 15th Nov., 2006, which the assessee challenged on merits before the CIT(A)-I, Bikaner. The assessee, for the first time before the Tribunal, sought admission of the additional ground challenging the validity of the jurisdiction under s. 147/148 of the Act. The Tribunal, after considering the facts and legal principles, admitted the additional ground raised by the assessee. It was held that challenging the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment is a pure question of law. The Tribunal noted that if the notice issued by the Assessing Officer is invalid, the entire proceedings would be void for want of jurisdiction. The Tribunal cited legal precedents to support the assessee's right to challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer even if not raised earlier. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case for fresh consideration on all issues, including the jurisdictional challenge raised by the assessee. The Tribunal declined to adjudicate the additional ground on merits at that stage and emphasized the need for the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with the law. The decision was based on legal principles outlined in various judgments, including the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes. End of Summary
|
