TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 369
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted in 229 ITR 283 and Varas International (P) Ltd reported in 284 ITR 80, we are inclined to admit the additional ground and take up for adjudication. The additional ground raised by the assessee is as under:- "a) That the order of assessment dated 19.12.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act is without jurisdiction since the learned Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, who framed the impugned assessment was not empowered or authorized or directed under the provisions of sec. 120(4)(b) read with section 2(7A) of the Act to exercise the powers or perform the functions of Assessing Officer and as such, he did not have the jurisdiction to make the assessment since the order granting him jurisdiction under Section 120(2) and Section 120(4) was not passed, as is evident from the assessment order for the impugned assessment year, hence assessment is illegal, invalid and, be quashed as such." 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The return of income for AY 2014-15 was filed by the assessee company on 29.11.2014 declaring loss of Rs. 5,66,60,134/- which was duly processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The assessee company is manu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hing the details called for by the assessee in its RTI application were provided by the first appellate authority. Instead it was mentioned that PAN of the jurisdiction of the assessee company lies with DCIT, Central Circle-18, the RTI application was transferred to DCIT, Central Circle on 19.03.2025. This obviously does not contain the documents called for by the assessee such as order passed u/s 127 of the Act on 04.08.2016 and order, if any, passed u/s 120(2)/ 120(4)(b) of the Act authorizing the Pr. CIT to give jurisdiction of the assessment of the assessee to the Addl CIT. Ultimately, the first appellate authority refused to condone the delay in filing the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the First Appellate Authority, the 2nd appeal was filed by the assessee on 19.06.2025 before the Central Information Commission (CIC), New Delhi. 5. A letter dated 07.05.2025 was addressed by Assistant CIT, Central Circle-27, Delhi to assessee in connection with the RTI on 07.03.2025 filed by the assessee referred supra. In the said letter, the ld ACIT, Central Circle-27, Delhi categorically admitted that after the completion of the assessment for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to Section 120(1) and (2) of the I.T. Act, the Board may assign to Income Tax Authorities to exercise any of the powers and perform of or any of the functions conferred on as the case may be under this Act to act as Income Tax Authorities. The Board may also issue directions or authorise any other Income Tax Authorities to issue orders in writing for exercise of powers and perform of functions by or any of other Income Tax Authorities who were subordinate to it. In issuance of such directions under sub-sections (i) and (ii), the Board or any other Income Tax Authorities authorised by it may have regard to the criteria namely territorial area, person or class of persons, income or class of income and cases or class of cases. According to Section 120(4) of the I.T. Act, Board may by general or special order authorise or empower Pr. Director General or Director General or Pr. Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Pr. Commissioner or Commissioner to issue order in writing that the powers and functions conferred on or as the case may be assign to the A.O. by or under this Act in respect of any specified area or person or class of persons or income or class of income or case or cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., in which it is mentioned in para-2 that on 01.08.2007, a Notification was issued under section 120(2) conferring power upon Addl. CIT. Therefore, this Judgment would not support the case of the Revenue. It may be noted further that provisions of Section 124(3) of the I.T. Act would not be applicable in the case of the assessee because Addl. CIT, Range-23, New Delhi did not have jurisdiction over the case of the assessee. Therefore, there is no question of raising any objection before him. It may, however, noted that Section 124 of the I.T. Act would come into play when there was a direction or order issued under section 120(1)(2) of the I.T. Act and A.O. have been vested with the jurisdiction over the case of the assessee. In that event, if there is any dispute of the jurisdiction of the A.O, such question will be determined in accordance with the provisions of Section 124 of the Income Tax Act. However, in the present case, the Addl. CIT, Range23, New Delhi lacks in jurisdiction over the case of assessee. In the absence of any Order or Notification issued by the Board or any other Income Tax Authority in this behalf, contentions of Ld. D.R. are rejected. Considering the totality....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the eyes of law in not taking into consideration that the assessee is barred from questioning the validity of jurisdiction assumed by an Assessing Officer after the time stipulated, according to clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (3) of section 124 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?" 5. Before us Mr. Maratha has essentially addressed submissions on the ambit of Section 124(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act"] to contend that since the respondent-assessee had failed to raise any question with respect to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer ["AO"] in accordance with the provisions made in Section 124(3) of the Act, it would clearly not amount to an illegality nor would it lead to irreversible consequences. According to Mr. Maratha, the ITAT has clearly erred in holding the order to be void ab initio. 6. In our considered opinion, the provisions of Section 124(3) of the Act and the questions surrounding that provision would have warranted further consideration, provided the appellant had been able to establish that the Addl. CIT Range-23, New Delhi was duly empowered to act as the AO. 7. We note from the judgment rendered by the ITAT that the Addl. CIT Ra....