9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Gurmel Singh, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 12.04.2019 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, New Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s. 143(3)/147 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. In the grounds of appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That under the facts and circumstances the proceedings u/s.147 / 148 initiated and completed on the basis of reasons recorded by the A.O. Ward-lO(l) who was not having the jurisdiction and no fresh reasons being recorded by the jurisdictional A.O. of Ward-10(4). the whole proceedings are without jurisdiction, illegal and unsustainable in law. 2. That under the facts and circumstances, proceedings u/s. 147/148 initiated since without jurisdiction, without application of mind, on wrong facts, initiated mechanically and on borrowed satisfaction, hence illegal and unsustainable in law. 3. That the Ld. A.O., since failed in adjudicating all objections against reopening proceedings, properly, as per law and in totality and as per the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.K.N. Drive Shafts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been filing its return of income with ITO, Ward-10(4) wherein as per the PAN and also otherwise the correct jurisdiction lies before the ITO Ward- 10(4) only. The assessee has filed its return of income on 27.09.2010 before the ITO, Ward-10(4) which was duly processed also u/s. 143(1). Thereafter, notice u/s.148 has been issued on 31.03.2016 which has been assigned and issued by ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi who apparently did not had jurisdiction upon the assessee. The copy of 'reasons recorded' as incorporated in the assessment order reads as hereunder: "The assessee filed return of income for the A.Y. 2010-11 on 27.09.2010 declaring income of ₹ 5,690/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1). Information was forwarded to this office through the Addl.CIT, Range-10, New Delhi that search & seizure action was conducted by Inv. Wing at the office of Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jindal where various incriminating documents/materials were seized during the course of search. During the post search investigation and perusal of seized documents it was observed that Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jindal was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries by providing cheques/PO/DD in lieu of cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gation Wing , I have downloaded the return from the ITD portal and verified the records and it is clear that the assessee company has not disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the assessment year under consideration as it emerges that transactions shown in the return are not genuine. The value of share premium appears to be very high keeping in view the turnover shown by the assessee as the turnover during the year under consideration is Nil. I am in possession of certain material like statement recorded during search of dummy directors of companies of Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal) that discredits and impeaches the particulars furnished by the assessee company and also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there is a direct link between the information/available with the department and the income escaping assessment. I have, therefore, reasons to believe that income to the extent of ₹ 62,00,000/- has escaped assessment relevant to A.Y,2010- 11. Thus, the same is to be brought to tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material and information on the basis of which proceedings have been initiated u/s.147 and assessment has been framed, therefore, there is no illegality in such proceedings. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order as well as the material placed on record on the issue raised in ground no.1 by the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the correct jurisdiction of the assessee lies with ITO, Ward-10(4) and prior to the issuance of notice u/s 148, the income tax returns, for Assessment Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 were filed before ITO, Ward-10(4). This information was already there on the record and even the PAN jurisdiction mentioned the jurisdiction of the assessee is before ITO, Ward-10(4). However, the reasons as incorporated in the assessment order have been recorded by ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi and the approval u/s.151 has been sought from PCIT on the 'reasons recorded' by ITO, Ward-10(1) on 30.03.2017, thereafter the notice u/s.148 issued by ITO, Ward-10(4) on 31.03.2017 and the assessment has been framed by the same officer on 30.12.17. Following chronology of event from the records placed in the paper-book makes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction over the assessee. The notice under section 148 being a jurisdictional notice, any inherent defect therein could not be cured under section 292B. It was not possible for the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, viz., the Deputy Commissioner to issue the notice under section 148 on or before March 31, 2018 as migration of the permanent account number was not possible within that short period and therefore, the Income-tax Officer had issued the notice instead of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Thus there was an admission on the part of the Department that the Deputy Commissioner, Circle 2, who had jurisdiction over the assessee had not issued the notice under section 148 but it was the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2) who did not have any jurisdiction over the assessee who has issued such notice. No proceedings could have been taken under section 147 in pursuance of such invalid notice. The notice under section 148(1) and all the proceedings taken pursuant thereto could not be sustained. 7. Here in this case, though situation is reversed that reasons have been recorded by non jurisdictional Assessing Officer but notice was issued by jurisdictional Assessing Officer. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
