Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2022 (12) TMI 1493 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Reassessment order invalid when notice u/s.148 issued by non-jurisdictional officer without proper transfer u/s.127 ITAT Raipur held that a reassessment order u/ss.143(3)/147 passed by ITO Ward-2(1), Bhilai based on notice u/s.148 issued by non-jurisdictional officer ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Reassessment order invalid when notice u/s.148 issued by non-jurisdictional officer without proper transfer u/s.127

                          ITAT Raipur held that a reassessment order u/ss.143(3)/147 passed by ITO Ward-2(1), Bhilai based on notice u/s.148 issued by non-jurisdictional officer ITO Ward-1(1), Raipur was invalid. The jurisdictional officer who completed the assessment had not issued any notice u/s.148 but relied on notice from non-jurisdictional officer. No valid transfer of jurisdiction u/s.127 was established by the department. The assessment was held devoid of legal force and the assessee's appeal was allowed.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Validity of jurisdiction assumed by the Assessing Officer (A.O) for framing the assessment.
                          2. Issuance of notice under Section 148 by a non-jurisdictional A.O.
                          3. Non-issuance of notice under Section 143(2) after filing return of income in response to notice under Section 148.
                          4. Addition of Rs. 13,86,385/- as undisclosed income from dealing in land.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Validity of Jurisdiction Assumed by the A.O:
                          The core issue revolved around whether the ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai had valid jurisdiction to frame the assessment under Sections 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016. The assessee contended that the jurisdiction was improperly assumed since the notice under Section 148 was issued by the ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur, who did not have jurisdiction over the assessee's case. The Tribunal observed that the assessee was a resident of Durg, and the jurisdiction was with the ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai. The assessment framed by the ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai on the basis of a notice issued by a non-jurisdictional officer (ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur) was deemed invalid. This position was supported by various judicial precedents, including CIT Vs Jet Airways (I) Ltd. and Ashok Devichand Jain Vs. UOI, which held that an assessment based on a notice issued by a non-jurisdictional officer is not sustainable.

                          2. Issuance of Notice under Section 148 by a Non-Jurisdictional A.O:
                          The Tribunal noted that the notice under Section 148 dated 23.03.2015 was issued by the ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur, who did not have jurisdiction over the assessee. The case records were later transferred to ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai, who framed the assessment without issuing a fresh notice under Section 148. The Tribunal held that the assessment was invalid as the initial notice under Section 148 was issued by a non-jurisdictional officer. This finding was consistent with the judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts in similar cases, which emphasized that an assessment based on a notice by a non-jurisdictional officer is void.

                          3. Non-Issuance of Notice under Section 143(2):
                          The assessee argued that the A.O failed to issue a notice under Section 143(2) after the return of income was filed in response to the notice under Section 148. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue separately, as the assessment was already quashed on the grounds of invalid jurisdiction. However, it was implied that this procedural lapse further supported the assessee's position.

                          4. Addition of Rs. 13,86,385/- as Undisclosed Income:
                          The A.O had made an addition of Rs. 13,86,385/- based on the differential amount between the purchase and sale agreements of a land transaction. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. However, since the Tribunal quashed the entire assessment for lack of valid jurisdiction, it did not delve into the merits of this addition. The Tribunal left the contentions regarding the merits of the addition open, as the primary issue of jurisdiction invalidated the entire assessment process.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the assessment framed by the ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai, on the basis of a notice issued by a non-jurisdictional officer. The assessment was deemed invalid and devoid of legal force. Consequently, other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee were not adjudicated, and the general ground of appeal was dismissed as not pressed. The judgment emphasized the necessity of valid jurisdiction for the proper issuance of notices and framing of assessments under the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found