2025 (5) TMI 282

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r referred to as "the AO") under Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of case are that appellant/assessee filed income tax return for assessment year 2017-18 on 10.07.2017 declaring total income Rs. 9,08,630/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and case taken up for limited scrutiny for under CASS with reasons "large value of cash deposits during demonetization period as compared to returned income". Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on 27.08.2018 was issued. Later on, the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served upon the assessee. As per information, assessee ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h deposits is similar in period prior to demonetization and there is no unusual trend in cash deposits during the year under consideration as compare to preceding year. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in not considering the cash book submitted by the assessee when the assessee is maintaining accurate financial records. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in upholding the addition purely on the basis of assumptions and surmises without considering the facts of the case. 8. CIT(A) has erred in law in upholding the addition in the said case u/s 69A and section 115BBE of the Act as the said sections are not applicable in this case." 5. At the time of hearing, Learned Authorized Representative for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... which as per the above authority was required to be passed if the case is transferred to the jurisdiction outside Delhi. The appellant prays to draw your kind attention to copy of ITR (PB 17) where the jurisdiction of the appellant is mentioned as AO, Ward 26(1), Delhi and since, the notice u/s 143(2) has been issued based on same return, there was no reason for the AO Ward 33(1), Delhi to issue notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act ignoring the fact that jurisdiction of the case had been with different authority i.e. AO, Ward 26(1), Delhi. It is therefore a case where the assessment under appeal is outcome of a jurisdictional notice issued by a non-jurisdictional AO. In these circumstances, the assessment, resulting therefrom, nee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eproduced/relied in the decision of Sukhdham Infrastructures vs. ITO ITA No.2611/Kol/2019 dt:23.02.2023 and the said decision has been approved by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Pr CIT Vs. Sukhdham Infrastructure LLP in IA No.GA/1/2023 dated 14.08.2023." 7. Learned Authorized Representative for the appellant/assessee regarding ground nos. 1 to 8 further submitted that regular ground nos. 1 to 8, on merits of addition of Rs. 15,47,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of IT Act. From para 4 at page 4 of AO's order, it is evident that the appellant has deposited Rs. 15,47,000/- on 24.11.2016 during the demonetization period and besides above, the amounts of Rs. 5 lakh was deposited on 12.08.2016, thus total cash deposited during the year has bee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e light of aforesaid rival submissions, it is crystal clear that notice by non-jurisdictional ITO, Ward 33(1), Delhi was issued. The impugned order was completed by the Ld. AO, Ward 33(1), Delhi having jurisdiction without issuing any notice. ITRs for the assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 at page nos. 5, 12 and 17 of the paper books, jurisdiction of the appellant/assessee was with Ld. AO, Ward 26(1), Delhi. As such, assessment under appeal is the outcome of a jurisdictional notice issued by non-jurisdictional Ld. AO. Therefore, assessment needs to be quashed. Reliance can be placed on decision of following case laws: A. Vedanta Resources Ltd vs ACIT W.P.(C) No.6372 of 2022 (Orissa) B. Louis Dreyfus Company Asia....