9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1(1), Pune. Transfer of PAN on 29-12-2014 is consequential to the order transferring jurisdiction. The PAN follows the jurisdiction. It is not the jurisdiction that follows the PAN. The effective date of transfer of jurisdiction is the date of order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax and not the transfer of PAN. Any order or decree passed by any court or quasi judicial authority without jurisdiction is a nullity. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial strikes at the very authority of court passing such order. The defect in jurisdiction is an incurable defect which cannot be cured by consent of both the parties to lis. In the present case the effective date of transfer of jurisdiction is 19-12-2014 i.e. the date of order by Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai transferring the jurisdiction. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer at Mumbai on 24-12-2014 i.e. after the date of transfer of jurisdiction, hence it suffers from lack of jurisdiction and hence, is null and void. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 177/PUN/2015 - - - Dated:- 9-8-2017 - SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM For The Assessee : Shri Kisho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as it is inconvenient for the assessee to pursue the matter at Mumbai. The jurisdiction in the case of assessee was purportedly transferred by the Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai on 19-12-2014. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 24-12-2014 passed the final assessment order making additions in the income returned by the assessee. Against, the aforesaid Assessment order, the assessee is in appeal before Tribunal challenging the jurisdiction of Income Tax Officer-3(1)(3), Mumbai in passing the assessment order, as well as, assailing the additions on merits. Resolution Panel (DRP) on 11-03-2014. The DRP vide directions dated 28-10-2014 upheld the findings of TPO and dismissed the objections of the assessee. In the meantime, the assessee requested the Assessing Officer, Ward-3(1)(3), Mumbai to transfer jurisdiction to Pune as it is inconvenient for the assessee to pursue the matter at Mumbai. The jurisdiction in the case of assessee was purportedly transferred by the Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai on 19-12-2014. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 24-12-2014 passed the final assessment order making additions in the income returned by the assessee. Against, the afores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax, the ITO-3(1)(3), Mumbai ceases to have jurisdiction over the case file of the assessee. The Assessing Officer cannot take plea that he was not informed about the change of jurisdiction. 3.1 The ld. AR further contended that the assessee could not raise objection with respect to jurisdiction of Assessing Officer before the DRP, as the jurisdiction was transferred after the DRP has passed directions on 28-10-2014. Hence, the objection is raised for the first time before the Tribunal. The ld. AR submitted that since, the impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction, the same is null and invalid. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bharatkumar Modi reported as 246 ITR 693. 3.2 The ld. AR further contended that where the jurisdiction has been transferred u/s. 127 of the Act, the jurisdiction relates to proceedings past, present and future in respect of a person whose name in specified in the order or directions issued u/s. 127 of the Act. To support his contentions the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad concluded. If in between the jurisdiction would have been transferred, the assessment would have become time barred after 31-12-2014. Therefore, no effective date was mentioned in the order transferring the jurisdiction. The Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on 24-12-2014 and it was thereafter that the jurisdiction of the case was transferred to ITO at Pune. 4.2 Referring to information obtained by assessee from official website of the Department at page 11 of the Paper Book-II, the ld. DR pointed that transfer of PAN within Range does not mean that the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer is transferred. In the Income Tax Department the officers have concurrent jurisdiction over the case in a particular Circle. The ld. DR referred to the order of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai dated 15-11-2014 (ref. no. CIT- 3/Restructuring-2014/Jurisdiction/2014-15) to show that the ITO in the case of assessee had jurisdiction over the case of assessee on the date of passing of the assessment order. The ld. DR further referring to the provisions of section 124(5) of the Act contended that every Assessing Officer shall have all the powers under the Act in respect of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The ld. DR placed on record a copy of the order dated 14-11-2014. 6. Rebutting the submissions made on behalf of the Department, the ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has been defined in section 2(7)(a) of the Act. A perusal of definition of Assessing Officer would make it clear that the Assessing Officer means the officer who is vested with the relevant jurisdiction by virtue of directions or orders issued u/s. 120(1) or (2) or any other provisions of the Act. Thus, the assessment order can be passed by the officer who is vested with the jurisdiction to pass the assessment order and not any other officer of the Department, who is not having jurisdiction over the case file. The ld. AR contended that a perusal of letter dated 19-12-2014 at page 7 of the Paper Book-II clearly shows that the jurisdiction in the case of assessee was transferred prior to the date of passing of the assessment order. 6.1 The ld. AR further submitted that the assessee could not raise objection regarding lack of jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in passing the assessment order, as by the time the assessee received the letter informing about the change in jurisdiction, the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne. 8. The assessee has challenged the validity of assessment order on the ground that the assessment order has been passed after the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer was transferred by the competent authority from Mumbai to Pune. The assessee had originally filed its return of income at Mumbai. After shifting of its registered office from Mumbai to Pune, the assessee sought transfer of jurisdiction of Assessing Officer from Mumbai to Pune. 8. The assessee has challenged the validity of assessment order on the ground that the assessment order has been passed after the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer was transferred by the competent authority from Mumbai to Pune. The assessee had originally filed its return of income at Mumbai. After shifting of its registered office from Mumbai to Pune, the assessee sought transfer of jurisdiction of Assessing Officer from Mumbai to Pune. 9. The assessee had entered into various international transactions during the period relevant to the assessment year under appeal. Reference u/s. 92CA was made to TPO by the Assessing Officer. On the basis of order passed by TPO, the Assessing Officer passed Draft Assessment Order on 10-02-2014. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WD 15(1)-3 MUMBAI WARD 3(1)(4), MUMBAI 10200069694 18/Jun/2008 A perusal of the above chart shows that before the date of passing of the impugned order PAN of assessee was transferred from WARD 3(1)(3), Mumbai to Circle 3(1)(3), Mumbai on 18-12-2014. Thereafter, PAN of assessee was transferred from Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai to Circle 1(1), Pune on 29-12-2014. The stand of the Department is that jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer changes when PAN is transferred. We do not agree with this proposition of the ld. DR. The jurisdiction is transferred when the order is passed by the competent authority to transfer jurisdiction. Thereafter, steps are taken to transfer PAN and files. There would always be some time gap between the order of transfer of jurisdiction and consequent events viz. transfer of PAN and files. The Assessing Officer ceases to have jurisdiction over assessee immediately after order transferring jurisdiction is passed by the competent authority. order is passed by the competent authority to transfer jurisdiction. Thereafter, steps are taken to transfer PAN and files. There would always be some time gap be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of transfer of jurisdiction is 19-12-2014 i.e. the date of order by Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai transferring the jurisdiction. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer at Mumbai on 24-12-2014 i.e. after the date of transfer of jurisdiction, hence it suffers from lack of jurisdiction and hence, is null and void. 14. The ld. DR has raised objection that the Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon jurisdiction of Assessing Officer when it is not raised before Assessing Officer. Reliance was placed on the decision rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. All India Children Care Educational Development Society (supra). We find that the aforesaid decision was rendered by the Hon‟ble High Court where the jurisdiction issue was raised u/s. 124 of the Act. In the present case the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer was transferred under the provisions of section 127 r.w.s. 120 of the Act. Further, the facts in the present case are entirely different. Thus, the decision rendered in the aforesaid case would not apply in the facts of present case. As such, the objection of the ld. DR is unsustainable and is therefore, rejected. would not apply in the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
