TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 4,35,42,600 on the count of 'unsecured loans' treating it as unexplained cash credits u/s 68, which is unjustified and is liable to be deleted. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 6,29,720 on the count of interest on unsecured loans, which is unjustified and is liable to be deleted. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 1,68,00,000 on the count of 'sale proceeds of immovable property sold on 4-11-20, treating it as undisclosed business receipts, which is unjustified and is liable to be deleted. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 50,00,000 made by the ld. AO on account of ad hoc basis, which is unjustified and is liable to be deleted. 6. The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case, as de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,140 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid additions in the assessment order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), but with no success the appeal of assessee stands dismissed, confirming the additions made by the Ld. AO under various heads (supra). 5. Being dissatisfied with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed an appeal before this tribunal which is under consideration in the present case. 6. At the threshold of the hearing, it is informed that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation being filed with a delay of 151 days. Regarding this defect Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA, Ld. Authorized Representative (in short "Ld. AR"), submitted that the present appeal was filed with a delay of 151 days for the reason that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was never physically served on the assessee, whereas in appeal memo in Form No. 35, manually filed by the assessee before the First Appellate Authority, the option regarding "whether notices / communication may be sent on email?" was opted by the assessee as "No" and the address of the assessee was furnished for sending the communications to the assessee. The assessee, therefore, was under Bonafide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4; and thereafter, the assessee-firm has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Bench on 24-2-24 in Form No.36 for the 3 AYs (i.e., AY 18-19; AY 15-16 & AY 11-12); however, it was mistakenly mentioned the date 28-7-23 in the Form No.36 (AY 11-12), in respect of the 'date of receiving the appellate order', however, no appellate order for AY11-12 in physical form has been received by the assessee-firm; it may kindly be considered & obliged. Yours faithfully, Sunil Kumar Agrawal (counsel for the assessee-firm) 7. Backed by aforesaid submission, it was the prayer by Ld. AR that the delay involved in the present case was on account of Bonafide reasons beyond the control of assessee without any mala fide intention therefore, the same may kindly be condoned and the matter of assessee may be heard on the issues raised therein. 8. Per contra, Ld. CIT-DR objected to the aforesaid contentions raised by the Ld. AR and submitted that the delay involved in present case is inordinate, therefore, the appeal of assessee needs to be dismissed on this count itself. 9. After a thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contention of the rival parties. On perusal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment made u/s 144 by Addl. CIT dated 3-2-14 would be invalid as without having valid assumption of jurisdiction for making assessment for AY 11-12, is liable to be quashed." 11. Based on aforesaid additional grounds, the assumption of jurisdiction for making the assessment by the Ld. AO has been challenged, stating that in absence of separate order passed u/s 120(4)(b) authorizing the additional CIT to perform the functions and exercised the powers of an Ld. AO u/s 2(7A) and also in absence of an order u/s 127 by the competent authority transferring the case from ACIT-1(1) to Addl. CIT, Range-1, the assessment order passed by Addl. CIT, Range-1, Raipur u/s 144 dated 03.02.2014 for the AY 2011-12 is without having a valid assumption of jurisdiction for framing the assessment, is invalid, void ab initio, and is liable to be quashed. 12. On the aforesaid contention by the Ld. AR, the revenue was directed to rebut, in response Ld. CIT-DR has sought time to carry out verification of records of the Pr. CIT-1, Raipur, to check that whether any order u/s 120(4)(b) of the Act to confer the jurisdiction to Addl. CIT, Range-1 to frame assessment in the present case was passed or not. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2024, during the course of hearings, the Hon'ble Bench of ITAT. Raipur has directed for providing a copy of Order U/s 120(4)(b)/127 of the Act, if any, in the case of M/s Dolphin Promoters and Builders, A.Y. 2011-12, PANO. AAEFD2588E. In this case, initially the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued by the DCIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur and thereafter the entire assessment proceedings have been completed by the then Addl. CIT, Range-1, Raipur. To make, further arguments and to support the stand of the Revenue, a copy of Order U/s 120(4)(b)/127 of the Act, if any, is required." In this regard, it is worthwhile to mention here that vide this office report dated 03.06.2024, it has already been submitted that "As per the CBDT's Instruction No.6/2009 [F. No. 22/11/2006/IT/(A-II)] dated 18/12/2009, the Range Head was entrusted the work of making assessments to reduce the gap between workload and disposal of assessment. Thus, in view of the above instruction, the Range Head passed the assessment order in the current case and for this reason, no order w/s 120(4)(b) and order w/s 127 of the Act needs to be passed in this case." 5. However, I have gone through all the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "If the assessee is aggrieved by an order of transfer, the remedy of the assessee is to challenge such as order in independent proceeding either before the higher administrative authorities as per the Act or in any independent proceedings by way of a writ petition or other wise. If no such challenge is made at the initial stage the issue cannot be raised in an appeal against the Assessment order". In view of the aforesaid discussions, grounds raised by the assessee on the issue of order u/s 127 / 120(4)(b) of the Act needs to be rejected. Submitted for kind perusal and needful. Yours faithfully, Encl. as above (Rahul Mishra) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) 5.0 During the appellate proceedings. following hearing notices u/s 250 of the IT Act were issued: a) Hearing notice dated 15.01.2021 fixing hearing on 01.02.2021 b) Hearing notice dated 07.07.2021. fixing hearing on 22.07.2021 c) Hearing notice dated 03.12.2021 fixing hearing on 20.12.2021 d) Hearing notice dated 10.01.2022 fixing hearing on 25.01.2022 e) Hearing notice dated 02.03.2022 fixing hearing on 17.03.2022 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd. under an agreement pursuant to which certain amount was debited in the purchase and expenses account at a certain rate plus 0.50p in respect of the cess imposed by the Government. At the end of the year, it was found that a certain amount of cess remained payable to 'A' Ltd. The AO. disallowed the same under section 43B. Before the CIT(A) for the first time the assessee produced a letter issued by 'A' Ltd. stating therein that it had deposited cess in full. The Third Member on appreciation of these facts held that the evidence in the form of the letter could not be considered an additional evidence. Additional evidence can be presented by the assessee on the grounds that-whether it was refused by the AO/CIT(A) at the time of proceedings before them or the assessee was prevented from presenting the same. This is not the case in the current scenario. The assessee himself escaped from presenting the facts before the AO/CIT(A). GROUND NO-1: "Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act" REBUTTAL : After the selection of case for scrutiny assessment through CASS, a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 01/08/2012 by ACIT-1(1), Raipur which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT Chandigarh outlining a scheme for improving quality assessments implemented in NWR Region. After taking into account various suggestions, it was decided to devise a similar scheme with appropriate flexibility for country-wide implementation. 2. Accordingly, it has now been decided that the following scheme for improving quality of assessments shall be implemented from calendar year 2010 onwards, (i) At the beginning of each calendar year i.e. in the month of January, the Range Head in consultation with the concerned Assessing Officer would identify at least 5 pending time-barring assessment cases in respect of each Assessing Officer of his Range for monitoring These should normally include cases taken up for scrutiny with the permission of CCIT. The selection should be done jointly by the Range Head and the concerned Assessing Officer. Cases of PSUs and loss-making concerns should normally not be identified for this purpose. This exercise should also include those Ranges which are held as additional charge by a Range Head in January. (ii) The Range Head would issue directions u/s 144A in the identified cases for the guidance of the Assessing Officer re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s completed by Assessing Officers of the CCIT Region shall be got evaluated by the concerned CCIT in the month of next April according to the parameters decided earlier. The overall results will be tabulated in the enclosed proforma and circulated in the CCIT (CCA) Region for information. Separate performance ranking should be done for Range Heads in respect of cases completed by them u/s 143(3) out of the cases selected under Instruction 4 of 2007 dated 16.5.2007, and those monitored by them under this instruction. (ix) CCITs may also devise methods for commending good performance of Assessing Officers in the area of quality assessments and reflecting the same in the annual appraisals. Important cases involving large successful additions may be reported to the Board in monthly D.O. letters. These can be also be sent to DIT (RSP&PR) for inclusion in the Annual Report of good assessment cases. 3. These instructions may please be brought to the notice of all officers working in your Cadre Control region immediately for proper compliance. Proformae Performance Ranking of Assessing Officers CCIT CIT RANGE NAME OF THE ASSESSING O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n law. A subsequent challenge at the appellate stage on the validity of jurisdiction, is not maintainable. Ld. AO in his report dated 07.10.2024 had further submitted that as per CBDT Notification No. 267/2001 dated 17.09.2001 directed that the Joint CIT and Joint DIT shall exercise the powers and functions of Assessing Officers where so authorized by the board or CIT. Further notification No. 732(E) dated 31.07.2001 was issued in this regard by CBDT. Vide Gazette Notification, CBDT directed the Jt. CIT to act as Assessing Officer u/s 124(B) of the Act. Ld. AO placed his reliance on the case of Jaswinder Kaur Kunnar by the Hon'ble P & H High Court, wherein it was held that if the assessee is aggrieved by an order of transfer, the remedy is assessee is to challenge such an order in independent proceedings wither before the higher authorities as per act or in any independent proceedings by way of a writ petition or otherwise. If no such challenge is made at the initial stage, the issue cannot be raised in an appeal against the Assessment order. With such assertion, it was the prayer by Ld. CIT-DR that the Addl. Ground raised by the Ld. AR needs to be rejected. 15. In rebuttal,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and also in absence of an order u/s127 by the competent authority transferring the case from ACIT-1(1) to Addl.CIT, Range-1; assessment order passed by Addl.CIT u/s 144 dt. 3-2-14 for AY 11-12 is without having a valid assumption of jurisdiction for framing an assessment, is invalid, void-ab-initio; and is liable to be quashed; Jindal Power Ltd (2024) (Raipur-Trib) dt.25-6-24 ITA No.201/RPR/2017 Tata Steel Ltd (2024) (Mum-Trib) dt.7-6-24 163 taxmann.com 345 Tata International Ltd (2023) (Mum-Trib) dt.24-3-23 ITA No.1605/Mum/2012 Vertiv Energy (P) Ltd (2023) (Mum-Trib) dt.2-6-22 (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 412 Nasir Ali (2020) (Del-Trib) dt.25-9-19 113 taxmann.com 515 1.5. the time limit for raising objection to the jurisdiction of the AO prescribed u/s124(3) has a relation to the AO's territorial jurisdiction; the time limit prescribed would not apply to a case where the assessee contends that the action of the AO is without authority of law and, therefore, wholly without jurisdiction- Bansilal B Raisoni & Sons (2019) (Bom HC) (Para 7); 1.6. the contention of the Deptt that where the assessee had not objected to the jurisdict....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot AIR 1996 SC 2664- Charu K Bagadia (2023) (Mad HC) (Para 15); Divine Light Finance Ltd (2024) (Cal HC) dt.3-7-24 165 taxmann.com 254 Ojasvi Motor Finance (P) Ltd (2024) (Cal HC) dt.3-5-24 163 taxmann.com 80 Charu K Bagadia (2023) (Mad HC) dt.27-6-22 146 taxmann.com 345 Ashika Stock Broking Ltd (2024) (Cal HC) dt.17-5-24 Weedo Ventures (P) Ltd (2023) (Cal HC) dt.3-1-23 7 NYPCTR 10 Weedo Ventures (P) Ltd (2024) (SC) dt.23-9-24 SLP dismissed 167 taxmann.com 615 Cosmat Traders P Ltd (2023) (Cal HC) dt.15-11-22 146 taxmann.com 207 OSL Developers P Ltd (2022) (Cal HC) dt.16-11-22 ITAT/145/2022 Bansilal B Raisoni & Sons (2019) (Bom HC) dt.29-11-18 101 taxmann.com 20 Lalitkumar Bardia (2017) (Bom HC) dt.11-7-17 84 taxmann.com 213 Dalipur Construction P Ltd (2017) (Alld HC) dt. 13-1-17 SK Industries (2022) (SC) dt.19-7-22 141 taxmann.com 569 SK Industries (2022) (Del HC) dt.31-5-17 141 taxmann.com 568 SK Industries (2015) (Del HC) dt.5-5-15 GP Infraventures (2024) (Raipur-Trib) dt.23-11-23 166 taxmann.com 723 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the impugned instruction, out of the remaining scrutiny assessments it is expected that 30% of assessment completed by the range head, 20% by DC/ACIT and 10% by ITO's. The notification no. 6/2009 relied upon by the revenue is only for the guidance of departmental officers to devise the method and mechanism in order to commending good performance of Assessing Officer in the area of quality assessment, the same cannot be considered as the replacement to order u/s 120(4)(b) conferring jurisdiction with the Addl. CIT, Range-1, Raipur. This issue has been discussed in detail in the case of Jindal Power Ltd. Vs JCIT, Range-1, Bilaspur in ITA No. 201 & 202/RPR/2017, wherein while dealing with the similar contentions raised by the assessee and defendant by the revenue are dealt with at length and a view has been formed by this tribunal after considering various judicial pronouncements, deliberating upon all possible aspects, under the following observations: 19. As stated by the DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur, no order u/s. 120(4)(b) of the Act vesting jurisdiction with the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Bilaspur to exercise or perform powers and functions of the A.O had been passed. Ostensi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice issued under sub-section (2), or as soon afterwards as may be, after hearing such evidence as the assessee may produce and such other evidence as the Assessing Officer may require on specified points, and after taking into account all relevant material which he has gathered, the Assessing Officer shall, by an order in writing, make an assessment of the total income or loss of the assessee, and determine the sum payable by him or refund of any amount due to him on the basis of such assessment:" (emphasis supplied by us) Ostensibly, as per sub-section (3) to Section 143 of the Act, the Assessing Officer shall, by an order in writing, make an assessment of the total income or loss of the assessee, and determine the sum payable by him or refund of any amount due to him on the basis of such assessment. As the assessment can only be framed by the "Assessing Officer", therefore, we shall now look into the definition of the term "Assessing Officer" as contemplated in Section 2(7A) of the Act, which reads as under: "2. In this act, the context otherwise requires :- xxxxxxxxxx (7A) "Assessing Officer" means the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....td. vs. ACIT, [2015] 155 ITD 1019. Also, ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Tata Sons Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-2(3), ITA Nos. 4497 & 4542/Mum/2005 had, inter alia, held that Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax can perform functions and exercise powers of an Assessing Officer only if he is specially directed u/s. 120(4)(b) of the Act. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the Tribunal are culled out as under: "3.26. In addition to the above, it further noted by us that only that 'Joint Commissioner' was authorized to act as an Assessing Officer who was directed under clause (b) of sub-section 4 of section 120 to exercise or perform all or any of the powers and functions of an Assessing Officer as defined u/s 2(7A) of the Act. Now, if we refer to section 120, its perusal makes further clear that only CBOT can empower the Chief Commissioners or Commissioners for issuance of orders to the effect that powers and functions of an Assessing Officer for a particular assessee or classes of assessee shall be exercised by a 'Joint Commissioner'. Despite numerous directions, the Revenue was not able to bring before us any order wherein any specific authority was given by any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of which such Joint Commissioners of Income tax. are authorised by the Commissioner of Income tax, vide Government of India, Central Board of Direct Taxes notification number S.0.732(E) dated 31.07.2001, S.0.880(E) dated 14.09.2001, 8.0.881(E) dated 14.09.2001, S.O. 882(E) dated 14.09.2001 and S.O. 883(E) dated 14.09.2001 published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, subsection (ii), Extraordinary. (Emphasis supplied)" 24. Also, we find that a similar view had been arrived at by the ITAT, Lucknow in the case of Prachi Leather (P). Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, ITA No.26/L/2010 dated 08.12.2010, wherein, after drawing support from the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Dr. Nalini Mahajan Vs. DCIT, (2002) 257 ITR 123 (Del.), it was held as under: "16.2 From the contents of the aforesaid provisions, it is quite clear that so far as Addl. Commissioner is concerned, firstly he has been included in the definition of "Assessing Officer" given under section 2(7A) of the Act With effect from 1.6.1994 as a result of retrospective amendment made by the Finance Act, 2007 but at the same time, it is also clear that the Addl. Commissioner will be Asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vires. Thus, unless and until an amendment is carried out, by reason of the redesignation itself, read with the provisions of the General Clauses Act, the Addl. Director does not get any statutory power to issue authorization to issue a warrant. Therefore, the Addl. Director (Investigation) cannot be said to have any power to issue any authorization or warrant to Joint Director. Consequently, notification dt. 6th Sep. 1989 is not valid in law to the said extent. 18.2 So far as the present case is concerned, though we are concerned with the powers of Additional CIT but the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court which was, though in relation to powers' of Additional Director (Investigation), is fully applicable to the present case. 18.3 In view of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and the discussion and following the law laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Nalini Mahajan (supra), first of all we are of the opinion that the Addl. CIT, Range-6, Kanpur having not been empowered to exercise or perform the powers or functions of an Assessing Officer, the assessment framed, by him was illegal and void ab initio. " ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../Del/2015 dated 17.09.2021. The Tribunal after carrying out a conjoint reading of Section 2(7A) r.w.s. 120(4)(b) of the Act, had observed that as no order was passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s. 120(4)(b) of the Act, therefore, the Jt. CIT, Hisar lacked jurisdiction to frame assessment in the case of the assessee company before them. Accordingly, the Tribunal had concluded that as the Jt. CIT, Hisar Range, had not legally and validly assumed jurisdiction over the case of the assessee company, therefore, the impugned assessment order passed by him being illegal and without jurisdiction was liable to be quashed. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the Tribunal in the aforesaid case are culled out as under: "36. In the instant case, (1) there is no order by the Id. CIT invoking powers conferred u/s 120(4) wherein sub-Section (b) empowers the CIT to issue orders in writing that the powers and functions conferred on or as the case may be assigned to the Assessing Officer by or under the Act in respect of any specified areas or persons shall be exercised by the Joint Commissioner. In the absence of any order by. the Id. CIT invoking the powers conferred by sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld not be completed to the best of the judgment of the Assessing Officer, whichever is earlier; (c) where an action has been taken under section 132 or section 132A, after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under sub-section (1) of section 153A or sub-section (2) of section 153C or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier. 29. Having given a thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid claim of the ld. DR we are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the same. On a careful perusal of Section 124 of the Act, it transpires that the same deals with the issue of "territorial jurisdiction" of an Assessing Officer. Ostensibly, sub-section (1) of Section 124 contemplates vesting with the A.O jurisdiction over a specified area by virtue of any direction or order issued under sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 120 of the Act. On the other hand sub-section (2) of Section 124 contemplates the manner in which any controversy as regards the territorial jurisdiction of an A.O is to be resolved. Apropos, sub-section (3) of Section 124 of the Act, the same places an embargo upon an assessee to call in ques....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ati Bench in the case of Balaji Enterprise Vs. ACIT (2021) 187 ITD 111 (Gau.). Accordingly, on the basis of our aforesaid observations, we are of the view that as the assessee's objection to the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Bilaspur is not an objection to his territorial jurisdiction, but in fact an objection to the assumption of inherent jurisdiction by him in absence of an order u/s. 120(4)(b) of the Act, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 would not assist the case of the revenue. 30. In fact, we find that the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Bansilal B. Raisoni & Sons Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Nashik & Anr, WP No.13391 of 2018 had, inter alia observed that the time limit for raising objection to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer prescribed under sub section (3) of Section 124 has a relation to the Assessing Officer's territorial jurisdiction. It was further observed that the time limit prescribed would not apply to a case where the assessee contends that the action of the Assessing Officer is without authority of law and, therefore, wholly without jurisdiction. Also, we find that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ior court, and if the court passes order/decree having no jurisdiction over the matter, it would amount to a nullity as the matter goes to the roots of the cause. Such an issue can be raised at any belated stage of the proceedings including in appeal or execution. The finding of a court or tribunal becomes irrelevant and unenforceable/inexecutable once the forum is found to have no jurisdiction. Acquiescence of a party equally should not be permitted to defeat the legislative animation. The court cannot derive jurisdiction apart from the statute. (Vide United Commercial Bank Ltd v. Workmen, Nai Bahu v. Lala Ramnarayan, Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. v. Navrang Studios, Sardar Hasan Siddiqui v. STAT, A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal, Karnal Improvement Trust v. Parkash Wanti, U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. v. Indure (P) Ltd., State of Gujarat v. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot, Kesar Singh v. Sadhu, Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" 31. We, thus, are of the view that as the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Bilaspur in absence of any order passed by the specified authority u/s. 120(4)(b) of the Act had no jurisdictio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re of the considered view that on both counts, i.e. absence of requisite orders authorising the Addi. CIT under section 120(4)(b) of the Act to act as an Assessing Officer as well as absence of requisite order under section 127 of the Act transferring the jurisdiction to the Addi. CIT, prejudice is caused to the assessee as the impugned final assessment order was passed without any jurisdiction. 27. The issue in dispute has already been decided in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal as noted above. Therefore, in absence of separate orders passed under section 120(4)(b) authorising the Addi. CIT to perform the functions, and exercise the powers of an Assessing Officer under section 2(7A) and also in absence of an order transferring the jurisdiction under section 127 of the Act, the impugned final assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Act, in the case of the assessee, by the Addi. CIT for assessment year 2007-08 is without the jurisdiction and hence is set aside. As a result, the additional grounds of appeal, as mentioned in Part-B of the Exhibit-E of the aforesaid consolidated applicati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....HATTISGARH STTISGARH CH 22AA 777969 92/02/2026 GOVT. OF CHY शपथ पतà¥à¤° मैं हरमीत सिंह होरा, पिता शà¥à¤°à¥€ गà¥à¤°à¤®à¥à¤– सिंह होरा, उमà¥à¤° 54 वरà¥à¤·, निवासी à¤-1, साईं नगर देवेंदà¥à¤°, नगर रायपà¥à¤°, शपथपूरà¥à¤µà¤• कथन करता हूठकि :- 1. यह कि मैं हरमीत सिंह होरा, मेसरà¥à¤¸ डॉलà¥à¤«à¤¿à¤¨ पà¥à¤°à¤®à¥‹à¤Ÿà¤°à¥à¤¸ à¤à¤‚ड बिलà¥à¤¡à¤°à¥à¤¸ जो कि à¤à¤• पारà¥à¤Ÿà¤¨à¤°....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....¤¹ कि हमारी फरà¥à¤® के दूसरे वरà¥à¤·, कर निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· 18-19 का à¤à¥€ अपीलीय आदेश दिनाà¤à¤• 29-12-23 को पारित हà¥à¤†, जिसकी जानकारी होने पर मैं शà¥à¤°à¥€ सà¥à¤¨à¥€à¤² अगà¥à¤°à¤µà¤¾à¤², सी. à¤., राजीव नगर, रायपà¥à¤° के कारà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤²à¤¯ में जा कर संपरà¥à¤• किया, ततà¥à¤ªà¤¶à¥à¤šà¤¾à¤¤ उनà¥à¤¹à¥‹à¤‚ने कर निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· 11-12, 15-16 à....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....¤¦à¤¿à¤¨à¤¾à¤‚क 16-5-2024 को सà¥à¤¥à¤¾à¤¨ रायपà¥à¤° (छ.ग.), में अपना हसà¥à¤¤à¤¾à¤•à¥à¤·à¤° कर सतà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤ªà¤¿à¤¤ किया। For, Dolphin Promoters & Buil V ।दिनांक: 16-5-2024 शपथकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ Part सà¥à¤¥à¤¾à¤¨ : रायपà¥à¤° (छ.ग.), 18 7 MAY 2024. SOLEMENLY AFFIRILED OR SWORN BEFORE NA BE THE WITHIN NAMED पहचान करà¥à¤¤à¤¾à¤ नाम .न .: 30Pa) ... 22) पिता पति ...... बड़ज़ाल मैलारी पूरà¥à¤£ m MMM. I ...... 5 In. el 8770047112 CL MARKANDE) NOTARYIAIMYICATE RUPUR I GHINDIA 11 7 MAY 2024 Document 3 CCIT : CCIT- Raipur,C.R. Building, Aaykcar Bhavan, Raipur Phone 0771-2331600 Pr. CIT Charge:Pr.CIT-1. Balpur CCIT : CCIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompanies deriving income from enerces other than ancome from business or profession and residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the following Accessing Officers of Range-1, Raipur (1) ITO 1(1). Raipur (2) ITO 1(2), Raipur (3) ITD 1(3), Raipur (4) ITO 1(4], Raipur (S) ITO Shatapara And whose any one of the last three returns of income as on I- April 2014 and as en ['" April of any Subsequent F.Y shows total Income /Loss of above Rts. [D lakh. 5. All cases that may be assigned u/s 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Document 5 Requirement of order u/s 120(4)(b) of the Act is also not applicable in this case (2) Vide the CBDT's Instruction No.6/2009 [ F. No. 22/11/2006/IT/(A-II)] dated 18/12/2009, management of scrutiny workload was provided as under:> MANAGEMENT OF SCRUTINY WORKLOAD Kindly refer to above 2. Considering the increasing gap between workload and disposal of scrutiny assessments, it has been decided In entrusi the Range Heads with the responsibility of making assessments in top revenue porential cases st Range to be selected on the basis of recumed Income. 3. In this regard, targets for disposal of cases by the Range Heads are prescribe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....final opportunity was given vide notice dated 11/7/2023, failing which the appeal woir :. he decided on the basis of material on record. There has been no response :v anis notice till date. In the absence of any reply whatsoever, the appeal is disposed of on the basis of material available on record. 6. Decision 6.1 I have carefully considered the grounds of appeal, the statement of facts Huid the details mentioned in the assessment order. Grounds no. 1 and 12 are general in nature and do not require separate adjudication. Ground no. 2 states that the vicer u/s 144 is erroneous as it was passed without adequate opportunity of being heard. The contention of the appellant in this regard has no merit. As mentioned in the assessment order, the appellant failed to comply with the following notices: notice u/s 143(2) daled 1/8/2012 and notices u/s 142(1) dated 27/11/2013, 2/1/2014 and show cause notice dated 21/1/2014. Adequate opportunity was given but was not ? wed of by the appellant. Thus, ground no. 2 has no merit and it dismissed. 6.2 Ground no. 3 is against the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB(10) amounting to Rs. 1,58,73,094/- As seen from the assessment order, the ded....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t made any objection; 27-11-13 Notice u/s142(1)(ii)/(iii) issued by Addl.CIT, Range-1, Raipur Invalid; --- since the Addl.CIT is not the AQ of the assessee for making 2-1-14 Notice/ letter issued by Addl.CIT, Range-1, Raipur for compliance Factual 30-9-11 details are as under: | ROI filed u/s139(1) declaring income of Rs.79,15,730 (assessment order- incorrectly mentioned Rs.82,60,200; difference is due to depre of Rs.3,44,464; tax payable Rs.26,83,210; not paid up to 30-9-11) 2 0 NOV 2024 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, रकà¥à¤¤à¥‚: Income TaxAppollata Tribunal, Rainy Document 9 21-1-14 3-2-14 Notice/ letter issued by Addl.CIT, Range-1, Raipur for compliance Assessment made u/s144 by Addl.CIT, Range-1, Raipur assessment u/s143(3)/144/ 147 for AY11-12 within the meaning of sec2(7A) i.e., sec2(7A) has been inserted from 1-4-88 in the Statute; --- in absence of order u/s120(4)(b) for becoming as an 'AO' u/s2(7A) for assuming jurisdiction over the case of assessee for AY11-12 in pursuance to sec124(1), 120(1) & 120(2); --- notice u/s143(2) issued by ACIT- 1(1) on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....functions by the A.Os who are subordinate to them as given in Column 3 of the said schedule in respect of such specified area(s) or persons or classes of persons or income or classes of incomes or cases or classes of cases as given in column 4 in respect of which such Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income tax are authorised by the Commissioner of Income tax. This notification shall come into effect from 16/10/06. Explanation :- For the purpose of this notification "residing" means: - 0) in the case of an individual, place of residence, unless otherwise provided in this notification. b) In the case of an Hindu Undivided Family, the place of residence of the Karta and: c) in the case of a firm or an association of persons, or body of individuals or a local authority and all other artificial juridical persons other than companies, the place where the head office is located. The expression "Joint Commissioner" will have the meaning assigned to it under section 2(28c) of the Income tax Act. (i) Kalyouthandhui 13.10.2006 ( Dr. Kalyan Chaudhuri ), Commissioner of Income tax, Bilaspur (C.G) Document 12 SCHEDULE S. No Designation of Addl.CIT/JCIT Subordi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... persons whose cases may be assigned u/s 127 of the Act. (i) All persons (other than companies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing officers) who fall within the Municipal Ward Nos. 9,12,13,14,15,16,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43, 44,45,46,49,50,51,52,53,54 and 55 of the Municipal Area of Bilaspur (29 Municipal Wards)and whose total income includes : ITO-1(2), Bilaspur Addl. CIT. Range-1. Bilaspur 3 1) Income from House Property and/or: 2) Profit and Gains of Business or profession and/or: 3) Capital gains and/or; 4) Income from other sources. ili) All cases of pensioners and salaried employees of Bilaspur District receiving salary/pension from State/Central Govts. (other than those assessable by the DCIT/ACIT or by any other Assessing Officers ) ill) All persons whose cases may be assigned u/s 127 of the Act. (i) All persons (other than companies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing officers) who fall within the Raigarh District (except tehsils of Kharsia and Sarangarh) and except those assessed by ACIT-1(1), Bilaspur and ITO-2, Raigarh and whose total income includes : ITO-1, Raigarh Addl. CIT. Ran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....panies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing officers) who fall beyond the Municipal limit of Bilaspur (except Masturi Tehsils of Bilaspur) and except those assessed by ACIT-2(1), BSP & ITO-2(2), Bilaspur and whose total income includes :- 1) Income from House Property and/or: 2) Profit and Gains of Business and/or: 3) Capital gains and/or: 4) Income from other sources. ii) All cases of' pensioners and salaried employees of private institutions (Private salary) viz. All Banks, LIC. BSNL, Universities, CSEB, NTPC, Municipal Corp. CITMS, FCI etc. falling within the districts of Bilaspur, Janjgir- Champa (other than those assessable by the DCIT/ACIT or by any other Assessing Officers ) il) All persons whose cases may be assigned u/s 127 of the Act. 8 Addl. CIT. Range-2. Bilaspur ITO- 2(2), Bilaspur (1) All persons (other than companies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing officers) who fall within the territorial jurisdiction of Janjgir-Champa District, Masturi Tehsils of Bilaspur and Manendragarh Tehsil of Korea Distt, and whose total income includes : 1) Income from House Property and/or: 2) Profit and Gains of Business and/or: 3) Capital....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m other sources. (II) 'All cases of pensioners and salaries employees falling within the Jurisdiction at (I) above (Other than those assessable' by the DCIT/ACIT or by any other Assessing Officers) (iii)" All persons whose cases may be assigned u/s 127 of the Act. 11 Addl.CIT/Jt.CIT, Range,Korba ITO-2, Korba (i) All persons (other than companies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing Officers)who fall within the Katghora, Pali & Kartala Tehsils of Korba District and Korba Municipal Ward Nos, 3,4,5,6 and 8) whose total income includes: 1) Income from House Property and/or; 2) Profit and Gains of Business and/or; 3) Capital gains and/or: 4) Income from other sources. (ii) All cases of pensioners and salaried employees falling within the Jurisdiction. at (I) above and persons receiving pension/salary from the South Eastern Coal Fields (Other than those assessable by DCIT/ACIT or by any other Assessing Officers) (iii) All persons whose cases may be assigned u/s 127 of the Act. Document 17 Addl.CIT/ Jt. CIT. Range Korba ITO- Ambikapur (i) All persons (other than companies and other than those assessable by any other Assessing offic....