2015 (7) TMI 917

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of the Petitioner for the year 2007-2008. 2. The Petitioner-trust (since dissolved) was established in 1978. By a Deed of Dissolution dated 28 February 2007, the discretionary trust was dissolved. On 23 July 2007, the Petitioner filed its Return of income for the year 2007-2008 and in its Return of Income, the Petitioner had declared that the trust stands dissolved as per the Deed of Dissolution dated 28 February 2007. The Petitioner's return of Income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 25 March 2009. 3. On 20 March 2014, the impugned Notice was issued. The reasons in support of the impugned notice as communicated to the Petitioner read as under - 'On verification of the case record of the assessee Trust ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....39;s objection to the Notice. However the same was rejected by the Assessing officer. 4 Mr.Toprani, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the notice is without jurisdiction on the following grounds - a) The Notice dated 20 March 2014 is without jurisdiction as it is issued by an Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax on a sanction of the Commissioner of Income Tax. This is not permitted as in such cases the sanction in terms of Section 151(2) of the Act has to be that of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. b) It was submitted that the original Return of Income tax filed by the Petitioner was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act but beyond the period of limitation provided under Section 143(1) of the Act. Thus t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al Board of Direct Taxes, wherein the Joint Commissioner / Additional Commissioner who has granted sanction had been promoted to the rank of the Commissioner. However the order itself provides that he will continue to discharge functions which he was performing till then, i.e. of the Joint Commissioner. Therefore, the sanction was appropriately obtained of the Joint Commissioner. b) The intimation under Section 143(1) is within the period of limitation as provided thereunder, as is evident from the intimation which has been annexed by the Respondent to its reply. Consequently, there is no pending assessment which would prohibit the Assessing Officer from issuing the impugned Notice. Further the fact that there was true and full disclosur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dditional Commissioner. Thus the CBDT has in terms of Section 120(2) of the Act authorised Commissioner to exercise / or perform functions of an Income Tax authority subordinate to him i.e. of Joint / Addl. Commissioner. Consequently, the impugned Notice cannot be said to be without jurisdiction on account of lack of sanction. 7. So far as the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer in support of the impugned Notice is concerned, we find that it clearly indicates that the information leading to the impugned notice was received from the Assessing Officer of the beneficiaries. However it is also recorded in the Notice itself that the same was issued after verification of the information. Thus, we do not accept Mr.Toprani's submission....