TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1114
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment order) was issued or served on the assessee. And the additional ground no. (ii) is that the notice issued by ITO, Ward No. 34(2), Kolkata u/s. 143(2) of the Act was without jurisdiction, hence, the assessment order framed by ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata without issuing notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was null in the eyes of law and, therefore, deserves to be quashed. 3. Briefly stated facts as observed by the AO, Ward No. 6(1), Kolkata are that the assessee company filed its return of income electronically declaring income of Rs. 8950/-. Later case was selected for scrutiny. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was served from office of ITO, Ward-34(2). Then the jurisdiction of the case was transferred to ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata and a notice wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-6(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(2) of the Act and which was served upon the assessee; and even though the notice was issued u/s. 143(2) of the Act was by ITO, Ward-34(2), Kolkata [ as per ITO, Ward -6(1)] who had no jurisdiction to assess the corporate entity like the assessee company, hence the assessment order framed by the AO (ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata) without issuing notice u/s. 143(2) upon the assessee company is 'null' in the eyes of law and, therefore, deserves to be quashed. It was also submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee company did not receive any scrutiny notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act from ITO, Ward-34(2), Kolkata though it has been acknowledged by the AO in the assessment order by ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata. Since the assessee did not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y an officer/authority who does not enjoy jurisdiction is non-est in the eyes of law. Ld. AR also brought to our notice that the claim of ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata in the assessment order that the file of assessee was transferred from ITO, Ward-34(2), Kolkata is itself illegal since it was pointed out by the Ld. AR that in the impugned assessment order there was no reference or mention by the AO (ITO Ward-6(1), Kolkata) of any order of transfer of jurisdiction passed by the concerned Pr. CIT u/s. 127 of the Act. According to Ld. AR, in any case, the assessee has not been served with any such order i.e. transfer order u/s. 127, or notice u/s. 143(2) or 142(1) etc. Thus, according to Ld. AR, the transfer of file from ITO, Ward-34(2), Kolkata to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from 15.11.2014 (page 5 of paper book) that Principal Commissioner of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-2, is the designated officer and under him Addl. CIT/Jt. CIT, Range-6, Kolkata has been placed under his charge (page 7 of paper book). On perusal of page 9 reveals that under the Pr. CIT/CIT, Kolkata-12 the Addl. CIT/Jt. CIT, Range-34, Kolkata has been placed under him (page 9 of the paper book). Thus from a perusal of the aforesaid facts reveal that the assessee being a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office in area covered by Pin No. 700001, the Pr. CIT/CIT, Kolkata-2 enjoyed jurisdiction over the assessee company. In the light of the Notification of CBDT dated 22.10.2014 [as wel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned clearly that he [ITO, Wd-6(1), Kolkata] has issued only notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. We note from a perusal of the impugned assessment order passed by ITO, Wd-6(1), Kolkata there is no whisper/mention about any notice issued by him u/s. 143(2) of the Act or even notice issued before framing best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act. As per the ITO, Wd-6(1), Kolkata, notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act has been issued by ITO, Wd-34(2), Kolkata and not by himself before framing the scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3)/144 of the Act. It is no longer res integra that issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) is sine qua non before deciding to proceed to scrutinize the assessment of income of an assessee u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Since the department has failed to adduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....null in the eyes of law. Moreover, we also take note that Pr. CIT/CIT-12, Kolkata under whom ITO, Ward-34(2), Kolkata functioned has not issued any order of transfer of the jurisdiction as contemplated u/s. 127 of the Act to ITO, Wd-6(1), Kolkata. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Kusum Goyal (2010) 329 ITR 283 (Cal) has clearly spelt out that the ITO on its own cannot transfer the jurisdiction without order from the competent authority. In this case, we note that there is no mention in the assessment order of any transfer order passed by the concerned CIT-12, therefore, the contention of the ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata that the jurisdiction has been transferred from ITO, Wd-34(2) to ITO, Wd-6(1), Kolkata is also without authority and vi....