2023 (1) TMI 662

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he 'Act'). 2. The Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in quashing the assessment order holding the same is null and void ab initio being passed by the Assessing Officer having no jurisdiction over the case. 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the address/registered office of the assessee since beginning is situated at Hakimpara, Siliguri, West Bengal. That the Assessing Officer at Siliguri had jurisdiction to frame the assessment. However, the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued by Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(2), Kolkata which was without jurisdiction. The assessee filed objections with the Assessing Officer objecting to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer at Kolkata, which was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on 20.08.1997. The assessee has filed its return of income in circle-3, Siliguri for the past and subsequent years as is evident from the ITR-V enclosed in the paper book for the past three years and subsequent two years. Further that all the business activities of the assessee are in Siliguri itself and there was absolutely no business of the assessee in Kolkata. He has further submitted that the address of the assessee as specified by the A.O in the scrutiny notice and the assessment order is that of Siliguri and therefore, there is no possible reason as to why the ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata would issue the notice u/s 143(2) and complete the assessment in the case of the assessee. 7. We have considered the rival contentions. Before proc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....classes of income; and (d) cases or classes of cases ...... A perusal of the aforesaid statutory provisions would reveal that the jurisdiction of Income Tax Authorities may be fixed not only in respect of territorial area but also having regard to a person or classes of persons and income or classes of income also. 8. Since the assessee was incorporated at Siliguri and further carried on business at Siliguri only and there was never change of address, therefore, as notified by the CBDT, the jurisdiction in the case of the assessee lied with the 'Income Tax Officer' at Siliguri. There is no explanation put forth by the Department as to why the name of the assessee was lying in the PAN database of the Income Tax Office....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alcutta High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Mohan Chand Motilal Kothari & Co. in GA No.1497 of 2016, wherein, the Hon'ble High Court, in the identical facts and circumstances, has observed as under: "A short ground is urged by the assessee in resisting the appeal being taken up on merits. It is not in dispute that pursuant to a CBDT Notification dated July 30, 2002, the Assessing Officer exercising jurisdiction over the assessee was changed. Despite such position, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-39, who had no jurisdiction over the assessee, carried an order in appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). At the relevant time, the ITO-44 had jurisdiction over the assessee.....