9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with regard to the fact that in the PAN data assessee is having address of Kolkata only. The ITO, Ward-4(2), Jaipur had issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 26.03.2018. This must have been with an idea that if record is being transmitted to the ITO having jurisdiction over the assessee then time limit will expire because on 31.03.2018, six year would come to an end. This notice has been issued by an ITO who does not have territorial jurisdiction over the assessee. Therefore, whole proceeding has been vitiated. An assessee can have property in various parts of the country but that would not mean wherever he has undertaken a transaction, the AOs of all those areas will assume jurisdiction over the assessee. It is an incorrect assumption of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issed for want of prosecution and assessee could not lay his hand on the impugned order. 3. On the other hand, ld. D/R submitted that assessee did not participate in the assessment proceeding and therefore, his conduct does not deserve any sympathy. 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. After commencement of faceless disposal of appeals, notices were being communicated to the assessee on e-mail and on certain time some of the assessee failed to keep a track on the e-mail. A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that first notice was given on 26.04.2019. Thereafter, after a gap of one and a half year, next notice was issued on 04.02.2021. Then again there is a gap of more than two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty Valuation Authority, therefore, the AO formed an opinion that addition u/s 50C of the Act is required to be made. Accordingly, he recorded the reasons and issued a notice upon the assessee. When it came to the knowledge of the AO at Jaipur that he does not have jurisdiction then he transmitted the record at his own and ultimately assessment order has been framed by ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that in the PAN data assessee is having address of Kolkata only. The ITO, Ward-4(2), Jaipur had issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 26.03.2018. This must have been with an idea that if record is being transmitted to the ITO having jurisdiction over the assessee then time limit will expire because on 31.03.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
