TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 715X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon [ 2010 (2) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] that the service of the statutory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is sine the qua non to initiate/commence the assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act. In this case, the AO, who has passed the impugned assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act, did not issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. But the said notice was issued by earlier AO/ITO u/s. 143(2) of the Act. The case of the assessee was not transferred by competent Officer i.e. Commissioner as per provision of section 127 of the Act. Therefore, the proceedings could not have been continued by the new officer/ITO from the stage it was left by ITO, Ward-Itanagar. In the circumstances, the assessment framed by ITO, Ward- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 127 of the Act by a competent authority, the order of assessment is without jurisdiction and ab-initio void. 4. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold the order of assessment passed by the ld. AO being barred by limitation was bad in law and unsustainable. 5.(a) For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the ld. AO after accepting the entire income of ₹ 1,05,87,134/- as declared by the appellant in its return of income was not justified in not accepting ₹ 8,00,000/- out of the same only for the purpose of allowing exemption under section 10(1) and/or 10(26) of the Act and arbitrarily treating the same as taxable income. (b). For that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in arbitrarily confirming the additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case in its proper perspective and in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 10.(a) For that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in arbitrarily enhancing the income of the appellant by ₹ 42,97,457/- being the amount of deposit in various bank accounts during the year which is without jurisdiction and bad in law and is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. b) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) could not cite any specific provision of law, which empowered him to tax the said bank deposits as income of the appellant. c) For that, without prejudice to the above, the aforesaid enhancement is bad in law also because it amounts to double addition of the same incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excess of the jurisdiction the same are bad in law and the same are liable to be expunged. 15. For that your appellant craves leave of your honours to take additional ground or grounds and/of to modify any ground(s) of appeal at or before the time of hearing. 3. At the outset, Ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that ground nos. 2 3 being on the legal issue raised by the assessee relating to the validity of the assessment framed by the Learned Assessing Officer (in short, the Ld. AO) may be adjudicated first and if the issue is decided in favour of the assessee then the validity of impugned additions on merit will be rendered academic in nature. The Ld. DR has not objected to the same. Therefore, the assessee's legal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitiation of assessment proceedings as per provisions of section 124(3) of the Act. However, the assessee at that time did not raise such objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Ld. AO. 5. I have considered the rival contentions. Though the Ld. JCIT has been empowered to allocate the cases to different Assessing Officers/Income Tax Officers as per their territorial jurisdiction. However, once the proceedings u/s. 143(3) are commenced, the case can be transferred from one AO/ITO to another AO/ITO by an order of the Commissioner as provided u/s. 127 of the Act. In case, the case is reallocated by the JCIT, in that event, the concerned AO to whom the case is reallocated, should have commenced the assessment proceedings by way of issuanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
