2016 (2) TMI 1198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... information. As per the information, the assessee had made payment of Rs. 33,64,665/- towards various credit cards as under: 1. Rs. 2,00,870/- Against Citi Bank NA 2. Rs. 5,01,270/- Against Dentsche Bank Kodak House 3. Rs. 16,31,506/- Against Citi Bank, NA 4. Rs. 3,41,600/- Against City Bank NA 5. Rs. 3,06,000/- Against Deutsche Bank, Kodak House 6. Rs. 3,83,419/- Against ABN Amro Total Rs. 33,64,665/- 3. As assessee did not file any explanation with supporting documents, the AO made addition of Rs. 33,64,665/- u/s 69C. 4. Ld. CIT(A) allowed the assessee's appeal on 2 counts, viz. - (i) The ITO Ward 1(1), Gurgaon was not empowered to transfer the jurisdiction of the case ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ota of evidence during the course of assessment proceedings. 4. The appellate craves the right to alter, amend, add or substitute the grounds of appeal." 6. Ld. DR referred to page 4 of the paper book wherein the letter from ITO Ward 1(1), Gurgaon to DCIT Circle 47(1) dated 18/23.11.2011 is contained and pointed out that the case was transferred to DCIT Circle 47(1), New Delhi on the basis of details in PAN data base as per which the jurisdiction lay with DCIT Circle 47(1), New Delhi. She submitted that under such circumstances, there was no requirement of passing order u/s 127. On merits, ld. DR submitted that CIT(A) wrongly accepted the additional evidence and deleted the addition without affording opportunity to AO. 7. Ld.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... notices dated 8.6.2011 and 26.8.2011 that the jurisdiction of the case of the assessee lay with ITO Ward 1(1), Gurgaon as per Instruction no. 1/2011 dated 31.1.2011 issued by the CBDT and also in view of order of Commissioner bearing no. F. No. CIT/FBD/Jurisdiction/2011-12/850-73 dated 13.05.2011. Therefore, jurisdiction primarily was with ACIT Circle 1(1), Gurgaon. The address given in PAN cannot decide the jurisdiction of AO. In this regard we may refer to section 120 which deals with jurisdiction of AO. The jurisdiction of AO u/s 120 is decided primarily on the basis of following criteria: (a) Territorial area; (b) Persons or classes of persons; (c) Income or classes of income; and (d) Cases or classe....