TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 861
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellate Authority. 2. That the assessment order is not just and fair under the circumstances. That there exists no adequate and valid justification for addition on account of cash deposits in bank account for Rs. 1927500/- in the appellant's income. That facts as apparent from documents submitted and submission have not been accorded due weight as warranted under the law. That the Id AO has made addition in a haste manner. That CIT (A) has not given due weight to the assessee his sale deeds, son's affidavit and other relevant documents admitted as submitted. 3. That the assessment order is not just and fair under the circumstances. That there exists no adequate and valid justification for disallowing deduction unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have also been comprehensively discussed. That the assessment proceedings relates to Financial Yr : 2006-07 not to Financial Year : 2015- 16. (c) The valuation report of the DVO dt 25.03.2015 had also intimated that the valuation could not be done due various reasons. That no copy of any Valuation Report dt 25th March 2015 has been supplied to the till the date. That the identity of the house can be proved by the Electricity Bill, Water Bill and House Photos. That these were duly provided. 7. That the CIT(A) committed error in law and fact in disallowing the grounds of appeal in respect of the cash deposits. That the AO and Ld CIT (A) has not allowed credit of duly supported cash receipts: a. Sale deeds dt 31.12.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es of AO.That there is no presumption in law that no persons can have cash in hand at his home. That the appellant is not supposed to act at the whims of the Department Officials. 12. That the CIT (A) has decided appeal on surmises and conjectures. That the surmises and conjectures cannot take place of the factual position. 13. That the CIT (A) has committed a mistake by dismissing ground of appeal relating to transfer of the proceedings from Rewari to Narnaul. That AO remained sit over proceedings even after objections were filed by the appellant before him. He acted as a judge and decided it in his favour in violation in the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 14. That the assessment proceedings were transferred w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....argued that he has to press only the jurisdictional issue for the notice issue u/s 148 of the Act for transfer of case from one Assessing Officer to another Assessing Officer. The ld. counsel at the outset read the provisions contained in section 120(1) and 120(2) of the Act which are produced here in below:- "120. (1) Income-tax authorities shall exercise all or any of the powers and perform all or any of the functions conferred on, or, as the case may be, assigned to such authorities by or under this Act in accordance with such directions as the Board may issue for the exercise of the powers and performance of the functions by all or any of those authorities. 71[Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... below:- "2. In response to notice u/s 148, no return of income has been filed by the assesses. Later on the jurisdiction of the case was assigned to the undersigned by the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Rewari Range, Rewari vide his office order F.No. 1151 dated 04.02.2013. Notice u/s 142(1) calling the return of income alongwith query letter was issued on 07.02.2013 and in response to this assessment proceedings were attended to by Sh. Naresh Aggarwa! Advocate counsel of the assessee and return of income declaring income at Rs. 91377/- was filed and case was adjourned to 04.03.2013. On 04.03.2013, the counsel of the assessee Sh. Naresh Aggarwal Advocate, filed written objection regarding jurisdiction of the case and the matter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 127 of the Act. Accordingly the ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate prayed that the jurisdiction acquired by the JCIT on him is extra jurisdictional and therefore the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was ab in initio void and deserves to be quashed. 7. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. Thus I hold that the assessment order dated 22.3.2013 passed by the ITO Ward (2) Narnaul was without jurisdiction, in view of the arguments made by the ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. Abhishek Maratha and I am convinced with the arguments so made by Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate and by reading the various provisions contained in section 120 and 127 ....