2022 (10) TMI 106

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The assessment order of Ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 16(1)(1), Mumbai u/s 144 for A.Y. 2007-08 in so far as the assessment the total income of Rs. 11,65,954 is totally bad in law and in facts, ignoring the fact that the accountant, appeared and submitted the details called for vide notice dated: 17/09/2009 u/s 142(1) of I.T. Act, 1961 and passed the assessment order u/s 144 of the act without issuing show cause notice for alleged addition. 2. The Ld. assessing officer has passed assessment order without jurisdiction and also ab initio invalid. Therefore, it is required to be quashed. 3. The Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me. 5. At the outset it was submitted by the learned AR, along with the paper book running from pages 1 to 96, that the assessee filed the return of income for the year under consideration dated 31 October 2007 at the Mumbai address. Subsequently the assessee vide letter dated 18 January 2008 requested to the AO of the Mumbai that the assessee has shifted from Mumbai to Rajkot and therefore his jurisdiction lies in Rajkot only. To this effect the learned AR drew our attention on the request letter of the assessee dated 18 January 2008 for transferring the records from Mumbai to the Rajkot which is placed on page 23 of the paper book. 6. The AO Mumbai, subsequently served all the notices including the notices under section 143(2) of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ai office or Rajkot office. There is no dispute to the fact that the intimation for the change of the address was duly communicated by the assessee to the AO of Mumbai and therefore the AO Mumbai made all correspondences including the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act at the address of Rajkot. Thus it is transpired that for all practical purposes the address of the assessee was shifted from Mumbai to Rajkot and this fact has also not been controverted by the revenue. In such facts and circumstances the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Shri Prashant Chandra Vs. CIT reported in 387 ITR 88 wherein it was held as under: 24. In the instant case, admittedly, on receiv....