Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback✕

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (9) TMI 2035

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to as 'the Act') dated 30.05.2023 by the Assessing Officer, ACIT, Circle-43(1), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'ld. AO'). 2. The assessee has raised additional ground No. B as under:- "B. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 as well as notice u/s 143(2) issued by ACIT Circle 43(1) Delhi is invalid as per pecuniary jurisdiction of the assessee company as stated in CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 which ought to have been issued from ITO only as per returned income of Rs. 9,88,690/-." 3. This being a legal issue and facts relevant for its adjudication are already on record, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd reported in 229 ITR 383 (SC), we are i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....It is trite law that instructions issued by the CBDT are binding on the Income Tax Department and not following of the same would render the assessment void ab-initio. Further the issue is also covered by the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ashok Devichand Jain vs. Union of India through The Secretary dated 08.03.2022 reported in 452 ITR 43 (Bom), wherein the CBDT Instruction No.1/2011 dated 31.01.2011 have been duly considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. For the sake of convenience, the entire order is reproduced herein under: "Petitioner is impugning a notice dated 30th March, 2019 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for A.Y. 2012-13 and order passed on 18th November, 2019 rejecting ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i, as the time available with the ITO 12(3)(1) was too short to migrate the PAN after obtaining administrative approval from the higher authorities by 31st March, 2019. 5. The notice under section 148 of the Act is jurisdictional notice and any inherent defect therein is not curable. In the facts of the case, notice having been issued by an officer who had no jurisdiction over the Petitioner, such notice in our view, has not been issued validly and is issued without authority in law. 6. In the circumstances, we have no hesitation in setting aside the notice dated 30th March, 2019. 7. Consequently the order dated 18th November, 2019 rejecting Petitioner's objection is also quashed and set aside." 6. Since th....