AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 799
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he petitioner for assessment year 2011-2012. It appears that before this petition came to be filed, the Assessing Officer has proceeded further pursuant to the impugned notice and has passed the assessment order. However, since the issue raised in the present petition is a jurisdictional issue, this court had issued notice in the matter. 4. The facts stated briefly are that, the petitioner herein filed return of income for the assessment year 2011-2012 on 1. 9. 2012 declaring total income of Rs. 44,05,746/. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, by the impugned notice dated 29. 3. 2018, the Incometax officer Ward 2(2), Jamnagar, sought to reopen the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2011-2012. In response to the notice, the petitioner submitted that the return filed by him on 31. 8. 2012 be treated as the return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act and requested the Assessing Officer to supply a copy of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. 4. 1) It appears that after issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, the charge over the petitioner's case was transferred to the Assistant Commis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be the same person. The court further observed that the form of the notice itself indicates that the authority has to record 'whereas I have reason to believe that income liable to tax for the assessment year has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Incometax Act, 1961'. Accordingly, the court held that the notice which was issued by an officer other than the officer who had recorded the reasons was invalid. Mr. Gandhi submitted that the above decision would be squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and hence, the impugned notice which is a jurisdictional notice is invalid and without authority of law. It was, accordingly, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed by setting aside the impugned notice. 6. Opposing the petition, Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the respondents, submitted that in this case the petitioner has responded to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act and has participated in the proceedings pursuant thereto, which have culminated into the impugned assessment order. It was submitted that the petitioner is, therefore, required to be relegated to the remedy of appeal under the relevant s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d approaching this court before such objections could be disposed of, ordinarily this court would be reluctant to interfere in such a case, more so, when the assessment order has already been passed, but having regard to the peculiar facts of the case, where the very jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer who issued the notice under section 148 of the Act is under challenge, this court has entertained the petition. 8. In the present case, what is the subject matter of challenge is the notice issued under section 148 of the Act on the ground that the assumption of jurisdiction on part of the Assessing Officer by issuance of such notice is invalid. The sole contention on the basis of which such notice is challenged before this court is that the notice has been issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2(2) Jamnagar, whereas the reasons have been recorded by the Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Circle2, Jamnagar. In this regard, reference may be made to section 147 of the Act which provides that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of section 148 to 153, ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT, Circle2. But as the income of the assessee was more than Rs. 15 lakh, the DCIT/ACIT, Cir2, Jamnagar held the jurisdiction over the case as per CBDT Instruction. The notice u/s 148 was required to be issued by 31/03/2018 and the migration of the PAN was not possible in that short period. It is pertinent to mention that as per the prevailing scheme of eassessment, the assessment was required to be made as eAssessment and all the correspondences/notices needed to be done online through the ITBA application as the such correspondences/notices then goes to the efiling account of the assessee which enable the assessee to respond through his/her efiling account. As the PAN was lying in the jurisdiction of the Incometax Officer, Ward2( 2) Jamnagar, the notice was issued from petitioner's Assessing Officer code. However, the assessment was completed by DCIT/ACIT, Circle2, Jamnagar who was holding the jurisdiction over the case and who recorded the reasons for reopening and formed his belief for reopening u/s 147. Since the assessment was completed by the same Assessing Officer who recorded the reasons for reopening and who holding the jurisdiction over the case, the validity of iss....