TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 72
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... he is not an Assessee on the file of the Income Tax Officer, Ward No.1(3), Tirupur, India, and he has no taxable income in India, except, certain bank interest in which TDS has been duly deducted by the banks under Section 195 of the Act. The petitioner states that he had applied for a Permanent Account Number (hereinafter referred to as 'PAN'), showing his mother's address as No.488, Mani Road, Kunnathur, Erode-638 103. The PAN was allotted in PAN No: AMUPR6293E. Since the petitioner is a Non-Resident Indian, he has not filed any Income Tax Returns for the last fifteen years and the said factors are known to the respondents-Income Tax Department also. Shockingly, the 1st respondent has issued a notice under Section 148 of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a resident of Belgium right from the year, 1991, and the respondents also have the knowledge about this fact and the petitioner, being a Non-Resident Indian, having no income in India, need not file any Return of Income. In respect of the bank deposits, the TDS are being recovered by the bankers and therefore, the very initiation is without jurisdiction, beyond the period of time limit contemplated and the transferring of proceeding to the 2nd respondent is also improper. For all these reasons, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents disputed the said grounds by stating that the petitioner submitted his application for getting PAN by furnishing the address, wherei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt in the case of GKN Driveshafts India Ltd., Vs. ITO reported in 259 ITR 19 (SC) are to be followed scrupulously. As far as the jurisdiction point is concerned, undoubtedly, the 1st respondent issued the notice under Section 148 of the Act in the last known address of the petitioner and subsequently, when the department came to know that the 2nd respondent is the jurisdictional officer, the files were transferred to the 2nd respondent, who in turn, issued a letter to the petitioner on 06.12.2018, asking him to furnish information and details for the purpose of proceeding with the reassessment. Instead of furnishing the details and producing the documents, the petitioner has chosen to file the Writ Petition, mainly on the ground that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tched before the expiry of limitation, the same would be sufficient to meet out the requirement of Section 149 of the Act. In the present case, the postal receipt is produced to establish that the notice was despatched on 31.03.2017 and therefore, the point of limitation raised stands failed. 6.The authorities once identified that the jurisdictional office is different, then transfer of such files to the jurisdictional office is the procedure to be followed and in the present case, the 1st respondent rightly transferred the case to the 2nd respondent to proceed with reopening of assessment proceedings and the 2nd respondent, in turn, sent a letter to the petitioner/assessee on 06.12.2018 and the petitioner, instead of responding to the let....