TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1877
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2. In this case the Ld. CIT(A) had provided relief to the assessee on the ground that the assessee filed its return of income on 01.09.2015. Therefore, as per proviso to section 143(2) the notice could have been issued only up to 30.09.2016. But in this case of the assessee the notice was issued on 12.07.2017 by the Jurisdictional Officer which was evidently beyond the prescribed time limit and hence invalid. The Ld. CIT(A) had also observed that in spite of repeated request to the A.O. for furnishing copy of order of transfer under section 127 of the Act the A.O. had remained silent and had failed to provide such coy and therefore, it was held by the CIT(A) that since no order under section 127 has been produced despite repeated oppor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) issued on 12.07.2017 by the jurisdictional officer (ITO Ward-3(1), Raipur). The return of income having been filed on 01.09.2015, the limitation for issue of notice u/s 143(2) expired on 30.09.2016. Thus, the subsequent notice dated 12.07.2017 is clearly time-barred and void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment order passed without a valid notice u/s 143(2) and without proper jurisdiction transfer under sections 127-129 is void and deserves to be quashed. The Ld. AO further failed to supply the relied-upon material, including the report of ADIT(Inv), Kolkata dated 13.12.2017 and the statements of Shri Narendra Kumar Jain and Shri Chandresh Kumar Jain, in violation of section 142 and CBDT Instruction No.20/2015. 8.4. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contentions advanced by the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties. Admittedly, it is a matter of faet borne from the report filed by the A.O, io. ITO-1(3), Bhilai dated 27.11.2024 (copy placed on record), that no order of transfer u/s. 127 of the Act transferring the case of the assessee from ITO-1(1), Bhilal to ACIT-1(1), Bhilai is found available on record. I find that the issue involved in the present appeal to as to whether or not the assessment order passed by the A.O de- hors any order of transfer u/s. 127 of the Act had been looked into by the ITAT, Raipur, "SMC" Bench in the case of Sarita Jain Vs ITO, Ward-4(1), Raipur, ITA No.260/RPR/2023, dated 24.06.2024, wherein after relying on a plethora of judicial pronouncement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Kusum Goyal Vs. ITO and Ors. (2010) 329 ITR 283 (Cal). In view of the above discussion, it is evident that despite repeated requisitions, the Assessing Officer has failed to furnish a copy of the order passed under section 127 of the Act. The Ld. AO has also remained silent on this crucial issue even in the latest remand report, despite clear directions and the relevant documents being enclosed with the requisition letter. The appellant has also repeatedly sought but not been provided with the order under section 127. Accordingly, since no order under section 127 has been produced before this office despite repeated opportunities, and in the absence of any valid transfer order or ju....