9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cularly when the assessee was filing the returns of income with ITO-VII(2), Chennai - the proposal for transfer of jurisdiction over the respondent-assessee, from Chennai to Suratgarh, materialized only on 21.08.2007, the proceedings initiated by the ITO, Suratgarh prior to this date by issuance of notice u/s 148 on 03.04.2006 cannot be considered authorized and competent. The facts regarding place of business or residence of the assessee, as sought to be referred carry little relevance in the indisputable fact situation that the assessee was indeed filing his returns at Chennai and the date/period when the proceedings were sought to be adopted by the ITO at Suratgarh, the jurisdiction for assessment in relation to the respondent-assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me with the Income Tax Officer-VII(2), Chennai; and prayed that the entire survey records be transferred to the concerned Income Tax Officer at Chennai. It appears that such proceedings were dropped on 18.10.2005. However, later on, a notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 03.04.2006 was issued by the ITO, Suratgarh for the assessment year 2003-04 which was served upon the respondent-assessee on 09.05.2006. The respondent-assessee again submitted that he was not residing at Suratgarh and reiterated the request for transfer of the records to Chennai. The respondent-assessee objected to the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Act but the objections were rejected by the ITO by his order dated 05.07.2007. It is borne out that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I(2), Chennai, both at the time of survey U/s 133 A as well as issue of notice U/s 148. From the perusal of case records it could not be ascertained as to why the proceedings U/s 143(2) were initiated on 06.04.2004 which were subsequently dropped on 18.10.2005. Secondly, soon thereafter i.e. on 03.04.2006 again proceedings U/s 147/148 were initiated. All along the appellant had maintained that the ITO, Suratgarh did not have the required jurisdiction over the appellant. Instead of addressing the jurisdiction issue the AO apparently was not sure about the correct course of action to be followed in the appellant's case. Equally noteworthy is the fact that much after the issuance of notice U/s 148, it is only on 24.07.2007 that the prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om Chennai to Suratgarh only on 24.07.2007; and held with reference to these facts and factors that at the time of issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act, the ITO at Suratgarh was having no jurisdiction over the respondent-assessee. The ITAT, therefore, found the similar nature order passed by the CIT(A) in relation to the said other assessee justified and not calling for any interference. The appeal in relation to the present respondent-assessee was also dismissed after finding that the identical facts were involved in this case. Seeking to question the order aforesaid, it is contended on behalf of the appellant-revenue that the CIT(A) and ITAT have erred in quashing the proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Act on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thereafter, on 03.04.2006, the proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act were initiated but then, a proposal for transfer of jurisdiction from Chennai to Suratgarh was made only on 24.07.2007, which ultimately materialized on 21.08.2007. We find nothing of error or illegality in the observations of the CIT(A), as approved by the ITAT, that the ITO at Suratgrarh got the jurisdiction over the respondent-assessee only on 21.08.2007 and prior to that, he was not having the jurisdiction over the assessee, particularly when the assessee was filing the returns of income with ITO-VII(2), Chennai. In the indisputable fact situation that the proposal for transfer of jurisdiction over the respondent-assessee, from Chennai to Suratgarh, materialized ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
