TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any was registered with the Registrar of Companies at Calcutta, the jurisdiction in respect of the assessee-company could lie only with the income-tax authorities at Calcutta. Since no order under section 127 of the Act has been passed by the income-tax authorities at Calcutta transferring the case to Guwahati it is held that neither the Assessing Officer nor the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals-2), Guwahati would have jurisdiction in respect of the assessee. Accordingly, it is held that the notice under section 158BD of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer at Guwahati completely lacks jurisdiction. 4 On the basis of such finding regarding the lack of jurisdiction, the Appellate Tribunal by the impugned order has quashed the assessment order passed as void ab initio for want of jurisdiction and on the same reasoning, the first appellate order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals-2) was also set aside. The Appellate Tribunal did not go into the other issues raised, as the issue on the jurisdiction, was answered in favour of the assessee. 5 Before examining the legality of the impugned decision of the Appellate Tribunal, the salient facts may be noticed. There was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, With reference to above it is respectfully submitted 1. That sir, in response to your notice under section 158BD, we had submitted return in Form No. 2B under protest on December 6, 1999. The notice and proceedings under section 158BD is invalid and with out jurisdiction on the facts of the case. 2. That sir, as will be clear from the audited balance-sheet furnished, the only source of funds are share holders funds. The detailed list of the same is enclosed herewith. 3. That sir, the share holders funds are also reflected in the balance-sheet, audited prior to the date of search, which means these transactions were duly recorded prior to date of search. However no return under section 139 was filed because income did not exceed maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax. On these facts it can never be said that these have not been or would not have been disclosed for the purpose of Income-tax Act. As such the same is out of definition of 'undisclosed income' under section 158BB of the Income-tax Act. 4. That sir, in this connection reliance is also placed on CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 287 (Delhi). Hope your honour will find the above explan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sam. It was further found that the assessee, although had their registered office at Calcutta, had never filed any return nor was ever assessed by the income-tax authorities at Calcutta. 10 Accordingly, it was held that the Assessing Officer at Guwahati had exercised his jurisdiction correctly under section 158BD of the Act and since it found that there is no other material, other than the Calcutta address, to indicate that the assessee-company carried on any business within the jurisdiction of the income-tax authorities at Calcutta. 11 On the basis of the aforesaid finding, the proceeding initiated by the Assessing Officer at Guwahati was held to be valid and the jurisdictional question was answered in favour of the Revenue by the appellate order dated December 10, 2002. 12 Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred a second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati and the same was taken up as I.T. A. No. 11(Gau)/2003. The Appellate Tribunal examined the issue regarding the jurisdiction of the assessing authorities at Guwahati to issue the notices under section 158BD of the Act. The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessee-company is registered with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me jurisdiction over any person if the place where he carries on his business or profession is situate within the area. If the business or profession of a person is carried on in more places than one, the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the principal place of business or profession will have jurisdiction to assess the tax liability of such person. The learned Tribunal disposed of the appeal setting aside the findings of the Assessing Officer as well as the first appellate authority merely because the registered office of the assessee is located at Calcutta. This by itself would not be conclusive. The learned Tribunal ought to have recorded a clear finding on the facts before coming to the aforesaid conclusion. We have perused the documents filed by the Revenue along with the memo of appeal. The assessee filed a remand note submitted by the Assessing Officer. From all these documents it is not discernible as to whether the assessee carries on his business in more places than one and therefore, we are not in a position to determine conclusively the question raised in this appeal. 18 In our view, the reasons cited by the Appellate Tribunal in declaring that the authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
