Assessment jurisdiction fails when an officer lacks valid empowerment and lawful transfer, making the order void ab initio.

An Additional Commissioner can frame an assessment only when validly empowered under section 120(4)(b), and a pending case cannot be taken over without a lawful transfer under section 127(1). The Tribunal held that the absence of such empowerment and transfer deprived the officer of jurisdiction to issue both the draft and final assessment, and that the assessee's participation did not cure the foundational defect in authority. It further held that objections to this lack of jurisdiction were not barred by the limitation applicable to territorial jurisdiction disputes. The assessment order was therefore treated as void ab initio and quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment framed by the Additional Commissioner, in the absence of a valid order under section 120(4)(b) and without transfer of the case under section 127(1), was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The challenge went to the legal competence of the officer who framed the draft as well as the final assessment. The Tribunal held that an Additional Commissioner can exercise the powers of an Assessing Officer only when specifically empowered in the manner contemplated by section 120(4)(b), and that a pending assessment cannot be taken over by another officer without a lawful transfer under section 127(1). It further held that participation by the assessee did not cure a foundational want of authority, and that objections of the kind raised were not barred by the limitation applicable to territorial jurisdiction disputes.

Conclusion: The assessment order was held to be without jurisdiction, void ab initio, and quashed in favour of the assessee.

---