TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that date the time limit for issuance of Notice u/s 148 had already expired by reason of provision of section 149 limiting the time limit to six years from the end of the relevant assessment year i.e 31/03/2010. In view of the above, in our considered opinion, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in directing the ITO, Ward 38(3) to make fresh order u/s. 147 inspite of the facts the notice u/s. 148 was validly issued only after expiry of time limit provided u/s. 149 of the Income Tax Act is not valid, hence, the same is cancelled and appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed. - ITA No. 4206/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 20-11-2017 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Sh. Yudhister Mehtani, CA For The Department : Ms. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar under consideration i.e. AY 2003-04 has to be assessed u/s. 147 by the AO having jurisdiction over the case i.e. ITO, Ward 38(3), New Delhi as per the provisions of section 147 read with section 150(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and allowed the assessee s appeal for statistical purposes. Aggrieved with the order dated 28.3.2013 of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has legally erred by directing the ITO, Ward 38(3) to make fresh order u/s. 147 in spite of the facts of the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was validly issued only after expiry of time limit provided u/s. 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He further stated that Ld. CIT(A) has also exceeded his pow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn in the regular Ward having the jurisdiction over his case, i.e. Ward-38(3) and instead filed in a different Ward i.e. Ward-39(4). However, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee has claimed that this was an error. He further stated that there is no evidence or material to show that such claimed error was a bona fide mistake, and looking into the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the assessee deliberately filed the return in another ward so as to escape scrutiny of the case; and further if the case was scrutinized, to be able to deny the jurisdiction. He further stated that though the assessee claims that a letter was filed before the ITO, Ward-19(2) informing that the jurisdiction is with Ward-38(3), but there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has given directions by stating that the income of the assessee for the year under consideration has to be assessed u/s 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the case i.e. ITO, Ward -38(3), New Delhi, as per the provisions of section 147 read with section 150(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961. For the sake of clarity, I am reproducing the provisions of Section 150 as under:- 150. Provision for cases where assessment is in pursuance of an order on appeal, etc. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in s. 149, the notice under s, 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an assessment or reassessment or recomputation in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubject-matter of appeal, reference or revision, that would prevent the AO from proceeding under s, 148 of the Act. It is also noted that according to sub-s (2) of S. 150, the provisions of sub-so (1) of that section shall not apply where, by virtue of any other provision limiting the time within which action for assessment or reassessment may be initiated, issuance of notice for such assessment or reassessment is barred on the date of the order, which is the subject-matter of appeal, reference or revision, in which the finding or direction is contained. It would, thus, mean that an appellate or revisional authority cannot give a direction for assessment or reassessment which goes to the extent of conferring jurisdiction upon the AO if his j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, if at the time when the order which was subject matter of appeal or revision was passed, the time-limit for issuance of Notice u/s 148 of the Act had already expired, the Time limit of indefinite period will not apply. Hence, the assessment order which is the subject-matter of appeal was passed by the Ld ITO on 29/12/2010, and on that date the time limit for issuance of Notice uls 148 had already expired by reason of provision of section 149 limiting the time limit to six years from the end of the relevant assessment year i.e 31/03/2010. In view of the above, in our considered opinion, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in directing the ITO, Ward 38(3) to make fresh order u/s. 147 inspite of the facts the notice u/s. 148 was validly issued onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
