Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (5) TMI 1088 - ITAT CHENNAI

2016 (5) TMI 1088 - ITAT CHENNAI - TMI - Validity of revision order u/s.263 - whether CIT-9 lacks jurisdiction as the assessment for assessment year 2011-12 was passed by the ITO,Ward No.VIII(1),Chennai, which falls in the jurisdiction of CIT-7 and not in CIT-9 ? - Held that:- In the present case, the notification is dated 15.11.2014 and the assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act was passed on 24.03.2014 falls in the jurisdiction of the CIT-7 and not in other jurisdiction. We are convinced with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee. - I.T.A.No.1536/Mds. /2015 - Dated:- 22-4-2016 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Mr.D.Anand, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr.Pathlavath Peerya,CIT, D.R ORDER PER G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai-9 in C. No.12/263(SG)/CIT-9/15-16, dated 29.05.2015 passed revision order u/s.263 of the Act for the assessment year 201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iction. The said order is illegal, non-est in law and lacks jurisdiction. 3. The Ld. CIT-9 ought to have seen that the order of assessment is not erroneous and that the Ld. CIT can assume jurisdiction u/s.263 only if the twin condition of the assessment order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue is satisfied. 3.1 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of pharmaceutical trading and filed return of income on 30.09.2011 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 75,100/- & petrol and kerosene expenses ₹ 25,300/- and assessed income ₹ 10,60,980/-. The assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was completed by the ITO, Business ward No.VII(1),Chennai. Subsequently, the Ld.CIT-9,Chennai issued show cause notice bearing No.12/CIT-9/263/14-15, dated 10.03.2015 stating that the order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Based on the assessee s assessment proceedings for assessment year 2012-13, Ld.CIT found .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

registered agreement of sale was entered on 04.04.2011, falls in the Financial Year 2011-12. 3.2 The Ld. CIT considering the specific clause in the Special Power of Attorney dated 03.03.2011, found that there is a transfer of capital asset being a land in term of provisions of the section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act read with section 53A of Transfer of Property Act and due to agreements, the properties were transferred in the relevant previous year 2010-11 and capital gains arose in the assessme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aborate explanations and further, challenged the jurisdiction of the case and argued that the assessee is regularly assessed to tax in Non- Corporate Range-9 under jurisdiction of Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai-7. Apart from disputing jurisdictional aspect, the ld.A.R also furnished explanations on power of attorney, sale agreements, and its disclosure as long term capital gains falling in assessment year 2012-13. The Ld. CIT considered the submissions, decisions relied by the assessee and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

signed has no jurisdiction over the case of the as.e The objection of the assessee is not all sustainable for the following reasons: The show cause notice u/s.263 was issued on 10.03.2015. The assessment order u/s.143(3) for assessment year 2012-13 was passed by the aCIT,Non-Corporate Circle-6,Chennai thereafter on 23.3.15. But, the assessee has not raised any objection before the AO and has duly complied with various notices issued by the ACIT, Non-Corporate circle-6. He has also notraised any .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessee to suit his convenience and held him avoid payment of legitimate tax to the exchequer. Provisions of the section 292BB inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 wef 01.4.2008 is also directly on the issue and negates the contention of the assessee. Hence the objection is rejected. 3.3 Apart from the jurisdiction, the Ld. CIT relied on the findings of the AO and the clauses of sale agreements and power of attorney, and consideration received from the purchaser and relied on the Tribunal decisions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edings and the revisional proceedings with supporting evidence and judicial decisions. Ld.A.R argued the order passed u/s.263 of the Act by CIT Chennai-9 is invalid and opposed to law and facts. The Ld. CIT-9 passed order u/s.263 against the appellant and the said appellant does not fall in his jurisdiction. Therefore,, the order is non-est in the eyes of law and lacks jurisdiction. The assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 26.03.2014 was passed by the ITO, Business Ward VIII(1),Chennai f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urisdiction of AO was clearly mentioned and relied on the provisions of the section 120(1) of the Act which reads as under:- Income-tax authorities shall exercise all or any of the powers and perform all or any of the functions conferred on, or, as the case may be, assigned to such authorities by or under this Act in accordance with such directions as the Board may issue for the exercise of the powers and performance of the functions by all or any of those authorities . Explanation For the remov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he CIT and referred to the page-6 of the CIT s order and argued that the assessee has not raised any objection before the assessing authority in respect of assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2012-13 passed by the ACIT, non-corporate Circle- 3, Chennai. Having accepted the jurisdiction in the subsequent year, the assessee cannot now claim the order of assessment for the year 2011-12 lack jurisdiction. and relied on the provisions of the section 292BB of the Act and filed c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version