TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 389
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12-13. 2. The grounds of appeals raised by the assessee are as under: "1. Ground No. 1-Lack of Jurisdiction 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction over the appellant and the jurisdiction lay with another Assessing Officer 2. Ground No. 2-Issues Regarding Notice and Order 2.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the appellant's objection that: i. The notice under section 148 was issued in the name of an individual, whereas the assessment order was passed in the status of an Association of Persons (AOP), an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t considering the appellant's objection that it neither owns the land nor has carried out any sale transaction, yet the Assessing Officer made additions on presumptions. 7. Ground No. 7-Confirming Rs.5,00,000 as Taxable Income of the Society 7.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming Rs.5,00,000 as taxable income of the Society. 8. Ground No. 8-Interest Under Sections 234B & 234C 8.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming charging interest under sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.2. The appellant respectfully submits that there was no fault o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... response to which, the assessee filed income declaring total income of Nil. Thereafter, during assessment proceedings, copy of the sale deed of the property was submitted. On verification of the sale deed, the AO noted that out of total sale consideration of Rs. 90 Lakhs the assessee society had received Rs. 5 Lakhs as confirming party. During assessment, the assessee was asked to explain the taxability of this amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs received. The assessee contended that it was a co-operative housing society having no profit motive and running on principles of mutuality and thus not liable for tax on receipts. The AO, however, rejected the contention of the assessee and made addition of premium received of Rs. 5 Lakhs to the income of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... drew my attention to para 3.2 of the CIT(A)'s order holding so as under: "3.2 Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer The appellant contended that jurisdiction lay with ITO Ward 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad and not Ward 3(3)(2). Upon perusal of records, it is observed that the appellant was aware of proceedings, filed replies, and attended hearings. While technical jurisdiction may be questioned, the appellant cannot claim invalidity where it has participated fully in the assessment proceedings. Jurisdictional objections raised at this stage, without prior objection, cannot nullify the assessment. This view is consistent with judicial precedents where mere technical defects do not invalidate proceedings (Kanwar Singh Saini v. High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessment. In administrative or quasi-judicial matters, where exercise of powers are well regulated and segregated through rules and regulations or administrative instructions, no authority or officer who is not vested with the jurisdiction of the particular nature can exercise such powers which would be purely a case of lack of authority failing which Where would be a total anarchy and any officer positioned at any place may choose to exercise jurisdiction over any assessee. 7. Reference to section 292BB of the Act by the counsel of the revenue would need summary rejection. The said provision guards against any objection to service of notice particularly when an assessee has despite any defective service of notice participated....