TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 1242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued by the Addl.CIT, Range 6, Kanpur for the assessment year 2002-03 (year under appeal) was valid; and thus the mandatory requirement of serving the notice under section 143(2) within the stipulated period of 12 months (from the end of the month in which 'return' had been filed) stood fully complied with. 2. BECAUSE the "CIT(A)" has further erred in law and on facts in holding that; "once the CIT-II, Kanpur had given the authority to Addl. CIT to be the A.O. of the instant case, the Addl. CIT/JCIT, R-6 had concurrent jurisdiction over the instant case with other officers of the Range" and accordingly the Addl. CIT was competent to give direction to other officers of the range to act an Assessing Officer in the case of the appellant, as per provisions of section 120(5) of the Act. 3. BECAUSE the Addl.CIT neither got vested with the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer in the case of the appellant, nor with the concurrent jurisdiction (alongwith other officers below his rank) in the instant case, and accordingly; (a) neither the notice under section.j43(2) dated 21.2.2003 asissued by the Addl.CIT, Range-6, Kanpur was valid; nor (b) he could have passed the order al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was whether the mandatory requirement of issuance and service of notice under Section 143(2) within a period of 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was filed, has been fulfilled or not and secondly whether the ACIT,Range VI, Kanpur got vested with the jurisdiction to act as an AO as earlier the assessee's jurisdiction stood vested with the ITO, VI(2), Kanpur. The ld.CIT(A) noted that a notice under section 143(2) dated 21.2.2003 for the assessment year 2002-03 has been issued by the Additional CIT, Range VI, Kanpur. These facts as mentioned by the ld.CIT(A), are as under : "4.3 That the notice u/s 143(2) dt. 21.2.2003 for the Asst. Yr. 2002- 03 was issued by the Addl.CIT, R-VI, kanpur, which has been challenged by the assess. I deal with the issue as under : 4.3.1 Whether the Joint CIT/ADdl.CIT can be an AO ? Section 2(7 A) read with Section 2(28C) of the Act encompases Joint Commissioner/ Addl. CIT within the ambit of an Assessing Officer. The learned A. R. fairly agreed that there is no quarrel with this except that to be an A.O, the Addl. C.I.T. has to be specifically directed u/s 120(4)(b) of the Act to exercise or perform all or any powers and functions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the assessee to act as an AO on the date of issuance of notice under Section 143(2) on 21.2.2003 or not, the ld.CIT(A) as mentioned the same in paras 4.3.3 to para 4.3.5 (supra). The ld.CIT(A) has categorically held that the Addl.CIT, Range-VI, Kanpur had the jurisdiction to act as an AO in terms of letter/order dated 21.1.2003 and therefore, was competent to issue notice under section 143(2) dated 21.2.2003. In this regard, the ld.CIT(A) has given his findings in paras 4.2 to 4.6.1 of the impugned order. 4. In this appeal, the assessee has challenged the above findings of the ld.CIT(A). 5. Before us Shri Amit Shukla, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Addl.CIT,Range-VI, Kanpur was not having the jurisdiction to act as an AO at the time when he had issued a notice under Section 143(2) dated 21.2.2003 for the purpose of scrutinizing the return for the assessment year 2002-03,which is impugned here in this appeal. Shri Amit Shukla, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that while passing the impugned order, the ld.CIT(A) has categorically stated that the Addl.CIT, Range-VI, Kanpur had the jurisdiction to act as an AO in terms of letter/order d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal vide its order dated 29.3.2009 has categorically stated that the letter dated 21.1.2003 sent by the ITO cannot be taken as an order passed by the CIT in exercise of his power under Section 120 or under Section 120(4)(b) or under Section 127 of the Act. The Tribunal has reproduced the said letter at pages 6 and 7 of the order dated 29.3.2009,which reads as under : "F.N. CIT-II/Scrutiny/(Tech)/KNP/02/03 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II KANPUR Dated:21st Jan.2003 To, The Addl. Commissioner of Income tax, Range-VI, Kanpur. Sir, Sub: Scrutiny Cases assigned-regarding. Kindly refer to your letter F.N.Addl.CIT/ER-6/KNP/02-03/7499 dated 16.01.2003 on the subject cited above. In this connection, I am directed to inform you that the following scrutiny cases have been assigned to you in which all pending assessments are to be completed at your end:- Sl.No. Name of the assesse. 01. Micro fin Securities (P) Ltd. 02. Tech Trusion Systems (P) Ltd. 03. Neha Exims (P) Ltd. 04. Super Tannery (P) Ltd. 05. Urvashi Synthetics Processors Ltd. 06. Prachi Leather (P) Ltd. 07. Shree Vats Finance and Leasing (P) Ltd. 08. Courtesy Motors (....