Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (1) TMI 662

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Officer at Siliguri. There is no explanation put forth by the Department as to why the name of the assessee was lying in the PAN database of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(2), Kolkata. The assessee has been continuously assessed at Siliguri only. Even, when the Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(2), Kolkata issued notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, the assessee objected to his jurisdiction. Hence, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in this case was Income Tax Officer, Siliguri. The case in hand is not of change of the address of the assessee. The assessee right from the very incorporation has carried on its business at Siliguri only. Even the notice has been issued to the assessee at its Siliguri address. Even the address of the assessee in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssed. 4. In appeal before the CIT(A), the assessee again took the objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order in question. The ld. CIT(A) wrote as many as three letters/reminders asking for comments of the Assessing Officer in this respect. Since no reply was received from the Assessing Officer, the ld. CIT(A) considered the above objections relating to the jurisdiction in the light of various case laws and held the assessment order as null and void being passed by the Assessing Officer having no jurisdiction over the case. 5. Before us, the ld. DR has submitted that since the name of the assessee was lying in the PAN database of Income Tax Officer, Kolkata and the assessee never informed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the sake of ready reference, is reproduced as under: Jurisdiction of income- tax authorities (1) Income- tax authorities shall exercise all or any of the powers and perform all or any of the functions Conferred on, or, as the case may be, assigned to such authorities by or under this Act in accordance with such directions as the Board may issue for the exercise of the powers and performance of the functions by all or any of those authorities. [Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any income-tax authority, being an authority higher in rank, may, if so directed by the Board, exercise the powers and perform the functions of the income-tax authority lower in rank and any such direction issued by the Boa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fficer, Ward-10(2), Kolkata issued notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, the assessee objected to his jurisdiction. Hence, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in this case was Income Tax Officer, Siliguri. So far as the reliance of the ld. DR on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. M/s I-Ven Interactive Limited, Mumbai (supra) is concerned, it is to be noted that in the said case the dispute was not relating to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer rather the issue before the Hon ble Supreme Court was that the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was not issued at the new/changed address of the assessee. The Hon ble Supreme Court held that if the assessee would not intimate the Assessing Officer about the change of the add .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... late Tribunal was challenged by the Revenue in this Court. This Court did not interfere with the order of the Tribunal and the matter rested there without this Court's order being challenged by the Revenue before the Supreme Court. In the present case, the matter pertains to the same assessment year when the ITO-44 has preferred an appeal where the initial assessment was not done by the ITO-44 but such assessment was conducted by the ACIT-39 at a point of time when ACIT-39 lost jurisdiction over the assessee pursuant to the said CBDT Notification of 2002. Since there was a fundamental error, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal as incompetent since the order of the Assessing Officer who had no jurisdiction to undertake the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates