2016 (3) TMI 543

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h in the letter. There is no dispute that the petitioning assessee accepted the ITO, Ward- 46(1), Kolkata to be the appropriate assessing officer prior to the issuance of a Central Board of Direct Taxes notification of October 22, 2014. According to the petitioners, by virtue of the said notification of October 22, 2014, with came into effect from November 15, 2014, the jurisdiction over the petitioning assessee ought to have been exercised by ITO Ward-22(2), Kolkata as the assessing officer. Upon receipt of the notices under Section 148 of the Act dated March 27, 2015 from the ITO Ward-46(1), the petitioning assessee sought to question the authority of such assessing officer by letters of April 29, 2015 delivered to the department on May....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pute that clause (a) of Section 124(3) of the Act does not apply to this case and the other situations in clause (b) pertaining to Sections 115WD, 142 and 115WH also do not apply. In the words of Section 124(3) of the Act, the material part of the provision, as far as it is applicable in this case, may be read as follows:- "(3) No person shall be entitled to call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer - (a) . . . . (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry of the time allowed by the notice under ...Section 148 for the making of the return..." The petitioners have sought to question the authority of the ITO, Ward- 46(1) to issue the notices under Section 148 of the Act to the petitioning assessee and the con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 of the Act assuming the role of an assessing officer. In so doing, it is possible that such ITO may not have had the jurisdiction as the assessing officer qua the assessee to whom the notice was addressed; but there can be no doubt that the authority was exercised by the ITO as an assessing officer. When the assessee received the notice, the assessee could question the authority of the ITO issuing the notice as an appropriate assessing officer within the time that the assessee was required to respond to such notice under Section 148 of the Act. Once the addressee of a notice failed to question the jurisdiction of assessing authority who issued the notice under Section 148 of the Act within the time stipulated in the notice under Section 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioning assessee in view of the petitioning assessee having filed the original returns with such officer. According to the department, the appropriate assessing officer of the petitioning assessee ought to have been the assessing officer whose duties have now been assigned to the ITO, Ward-46(1) under the notification of October 22, 2014 which became effective on November 15, 2014. However, such aspect of the matter is not gone into since such reason is not expressly or otherwise indicated in the impugned letter of August 17, 2015. If the reasons indicated in a relevant order suffice for such purpose, it would be wholly unnecessary to supplement the order with additional reasons which did not occur to the authority rendering the decision....