2025 (10) TMI 1007

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich is extracted below: - "2. FOR THAT the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC erred in upholding the validity of the impugned notice dated 27-07-2022 issued u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequential assessment order framed u/s. 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Id. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1. Burdwan in absolute infringement of the C.B.D.T. Instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31-01-2011 and the purported action on that behalf is altogether unfounded, unjustified and untenable in law." 03. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 31.10.2014, declaring total income of Rs.14,09,760/-. The assessment was framed in this case u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of India [2023] 151 taxmann.com 70 (Bombay)/[2023] 452 ITR 43 (Bombay)[08-03-2022], wherein a similar issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the court by observing and holding as under:- "2. The primary ground that has been raised is that the Income-tax Officer who issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, had no jurisdiction to issue such notice. According to Petitioner as per instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31st January, 2011 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, where income declared/returned by any Non-Corporate assessee is up to Rs. 20 lakhs, then the jurisdiction will be of ITO and where the income declared returned by a Non Corporate assessee is above Rs. 20 lakhs, the jurisdiction will be of DC/AC. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 7. Consequently the order dated 18th November, 2019 rejecting Petitioner's objection is also quashed and set aside. 8. Petition disposed. 9. No order as to costs." 06. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the issue was not raised before the ld. AO and the appeal was also ex-parte before the ld. CIT (A). Therefore, the same may be restored to the file of the ld. lower authorities for making decision on the issue. 07. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case, the assessee declared total income at Rs.14,09,760/- as per the return file don 30.10.2014. Thus, the jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act apparently lies with the....