9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transfer of jurisdiction could take place without complying with the mandatory requirement of Section 124(3) of the IT Act. See DEVIDAS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (AND OTHER PETITIONS) [ 1991 (9) TMI 18 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] No convincing answer given by the Department to shift the jurisdiction to the Balasore Circle, when admittedly, the Petitioner has already shifted to Kolkata and has been filing returns there. Accordingly, the Court quashes the impugned notices issued by the ACIT, Balasore to the Petitioner. It is clarified that the Petitioner will continue to be within the jurisdiction of the relevant Income Tax Circle at Kolkata where he has been filing his returns. This order will not preclude the Department from proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Circle, Balasore. 3. The Petitioner was surprised that the jurisdiction had been shifted from Bhubaneswar to Balasore and he accordingly filed an objection on 10th March, 2016. In this letter, he mentioned that from the beginning he had been filing his returns at Bhubaneswar and since AY 2011-12 had been filing the returns at Kolkata. He was unaware the transfer of jurisdiction to Balasore. He accordingly prayed that the assessment records should be transferred to Kolkata. However, on 8th March, 2016 the ACIT, Balasore again issued notice to the Petitioner under Section 142(1) of the IT Act requiring presence on 29th March, 2016 in connection with the returns filed by him for AY 2013-14. Along with this notice, a notice under Section 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n which the present Petitioner is one of the director having 10% share. He is also a partner of M/s. Nabadurga Minerals bearing PANAABFN- 8099-H assessed to tax in Balasore circle, which is under the S.I.T. for unearthing black money. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the jurisdiction over the Petitioner lies with the Balasore Circle. These facts were intimated to the Petitioner by communication dated 14.10.2015. After receiving notices u/s. 143(2) on 10.09.2015 and 14.10.2015 did not object to the notice on the issue of jurisdiction as per provision u/s.124(3) of the I.T. Act. In spite of adequate opportunity provided, the petitioner failed to comply with the said notices. 7. The fact remains that merely because the Petitioner hape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... place of his business and in the case of any objection relating thereto to have the same determined at the hands of a high authority like the Commissioner. The following observations of this court in the case of Dayaldas Kushiram v. CIT at pages 237 and 238 though made in the context of the scheme under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, need notice : In my opinion, section 64 was intended to ensure that as far as practicable an assessee should be assessed locally, and the area to which an Incometax Officer is appointed must, so far as the exigencies of tax collection allow, bear some reasonable relation to the place where the assessee carries on business or resides. ..... A plain reading of section 64 shows that the same is imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
