TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zaffarpur, who, in the light of the Notification, dated 22nd October, 2014, has not been vested with the jurisdiction to deal with the Trust, which do not claim exemption from payment of taxes, the Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Muzaffarpur, could not have, apparently, made any assessment of tax in the case of the present petitioner.Because of the fact that the assessment, has impugned in the present case, has been made by an authority, which had no jurisdiction to make assessment inasmuch as the authority to make assessment stood vested in the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Patna, the impugned assessment, so made, is void ab initio and cannot be regarded as a mere irregularity. - Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9170 of 2016 - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee under Section 143(3) of the Act on the ground that it is neither registered under Section 12AA of the Act nor has claimed any exemption under Section 11 of the Act. 3. We have heard Mr. Gautam Kejriwal, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, learned counsel appearing, on behalf of the respondents. Background facts: 4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts necessary for adjudication of writ petition are, in brief, as under: 5. The petitioner trust was established on 24.12.2007 and though PAN was obtained in the year 2008 itself, no annual returns for the Assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 could be filed for lack of knowledge of the trustees. On 20.12.2013, a notice, under Section 148 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y conferred jurisdiction on the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Patna, to deal with such Trust, which, as assessee, claims exemption, the assessment made in the present case by the Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Muzaffarpur, is wholly without jurisdiction and, therefore, void ab initio, the contention of the respondents is that the act of making of assessment by Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Muzaffarpur, is merely irregularity and is, therefore, valid in law. 9. While considering the present writ petition, it needs to be noted that in exercise of its power under sub-sections 1 and 2 of Section 120 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the CBDT has directed the Commissioners of Income Tax, specified in column (2) of the Schedule annex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. xxxx 5. xxxx 6. xxxx 7. xxxx 8. xxxx 9. xxxx 10. xxxx 11. xxxx ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en vested with the jurisdiction to deal with the Trust, which do not claim exemption from payment of taxes, the Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Muzaffarpur, could not have, apparently, made any assessment of tax in the case of the present petitioner. 13. In other words, the impugned order of assessment runs wholly contrary to the directions of the CBDT contained in the Notification, dated 22nd October, 2014, which are, admittedly, binding on even the assessing authority concerned. 14. Because of the fact that the assessment, has impugned in the present case, has been made by an authority, which had no jurisdiction to make assessment inasmuch as the authority to make assessment stood vested in the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
