9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of notice by the AO, Patna is bad in law and on this score also, order passed by the ld. AO as well as ld. CIT(A) is against the law and accordingly, both the orders are hereby set aside. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. - Sri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member And Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Sunil Surana, CA. For the Department : Ajay Kr. Shukla, JCIT (Sr. DR). ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The instant appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short AY ) 2015-16 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. CIT(A) ] dated 06.07.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 27.12.2017. 1.1. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee is a NBFC company registered with RBI and is carrying mainly the business of trading of shares and securities. The company is engaged in inter-related and inter-dependent trading activities on the platform of recognized stock exchange through SEBI and earn profit out of fund deployed in the securities tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts which are admitted facts. a) Assessment order was passed on 27.12.2017 b) Notice u/s 148 of the Act for the AY 2015-16 was issued on 31.03.2021 by the office of the ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna that is after four years. 2.2. Now, we have gone through the judgments cited by the assessee in this context which are as follows: a) Kolkata ITAT - Rungta Irrigation Ltd vs ACIT - ITA no. 1224/Kol/2019 - 06.09.2019 b) Supreme Court - ACIT vs CEAT Ltd - 449 ITR 171 -10.10.2022 c) Calcutta High Court - Calcutta Club Ltd vs ITO - WP No. 719 of 2014 - 14.02.2020 d) Gujarat High Court - Hynoup Food Oil Industries Ltd vs ACIT - 317 ITR 115 -07.07.2008 e) Kolkata ITAT - Samridhi Stocks Pvt Ltd vs ITO - ITA no. 75/Kol/2023 - 13.07.2023 f) Kolkata ITAT - DCIT vs Vantage Advertising Pvt Ltd - ITA no. 1319/Kol/2015 - 26.09.2018 g) Delhi High Court - PCIT vs Meenakshi Overseas P Ltd - 395 ITR 677 - 26.05.2017 h) Delhi High Court - CIT vs Insecticides (India) Ltd - ITA 608-609/2012 - 20.05.2013 i) Delhi High Court - CIT vs SFIL Stock Broking Ltd - 325 ITR 285 - 27.04.2010 j) Kolkata ITAT - Asit Kumar Patra vs ITO -ITA no. 2206/Kol/2019-21.02.2020 2.3. We have gone through the judgment passed by the Hon& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proviso to section 147 states that, where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 on in response to a notice issue under sub-section (1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year. Considering the submission of the parties, relevant records, Provisions of law and the decisions relied upon by the parties, in my considered view the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the proceedings under Section 147 of the Act are not sustainable in law and should be quashed for the reason that admittedly impugned proceeding initiated under Section 147 and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and in v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification from the assessee and the same was duly submitted vide detailed reply by the assessee. The assessee has filed the following papers in support of his argument which are as follows: a) Copy of notice u/s 148 of the Act. b) Copy of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. c) Copy of reasons recorded and approval vide letter dated 05.07.2021. d) Copy of objection filed in response to notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and the reasons recorded along with acknowledgment of filing the same. e) Copy of disposal of objection received. 3.1. Going over the documents filed by the assessee it appears to us that after query by the ld. AO mentioned in the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act a detailed reply has been submitted by the assessee through his letter in response to the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 20.06.20017. The reply of the assessee with regard to query made by the ld. AO is as follows: 6 (iii),(iv),(vi) and (vii) The Company has been carrying out inter related and/or inter dependent trading activities on the platform of recognised stock exchanges through SEBI Registered Stock Brokers for past many years with a simple strategy to earn decent amount of profit out of fund deployed in the secur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business from our registered office situated at R/N 325, 3rd FIoor, Martin Burn House, 1 R N Mukherjee Road, Kolkata - 700 001, West Bengal. Earlier the registered office was situated at 116A Stephen House, 6th Floor, 4 BBD Bag (East), Kolkata - 700001, West Bengal which is duly noted in your records and therefore, in view of CBDT Notification issued under section 120(1) and (2) of the Income tax Act 1961, effective from 15th November 2014, the Assessing Officer ITO Ward 4(4), Kolkata under the jurisdiction of PCIT -2, Kolkata is holding charge over our case. Kindly note that under the scheme of e filing of return, the assessee has to fill PAN in the return. It has to also fill its address and some of the details are picked-up by the assessee. If the Department's System fails to correctly transfer the return to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and transfer the same to another Assessing Officer who has no jurisdiction as per the CBDT's notification, such mistake cannot confer the jurisdiction on such an Assessing Officer. Jurisdiction can be conferred only by notification issued u/ s 120(1) and 120(2) of the Act. 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also filed a dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of income from New Delhi. Even in the software of the Income Tax Department where return of income is uploaded online, the designation of the Assessing Officer as per the address has always been mentioned as Range-18, New Delhi. Had there been the allotment of jurisdiction by virtue of PAN, then the software of the Department would have assigned the jurisdiction as when assessee uploads the return of income electronically online. Be that as it may, nowhere in the statute it has been provided that allotment of a PAN would be the determinative factor for jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer. Thus, we hold that ITO, Ward-10(2)/DCIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata did not have any jurisdiction over the assessee company and any order passed without jurisdiction is null and void. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned assessment order passed by Assessing Officer of Kolkata is without jurisdiction and hence the same deserved to be quashed as per the provisions of law. Accordingly, Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. 17. Since, we have already quashed the assessment, the grounds raised in the Revenue s appeal on merits stands dismissed. 4.3. Going over the entire facts as discussed above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
