TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to another Principal CIT ? - As decided in ODEON BUILDERS PVT. LTD., GULBARGA ASSOCIATES (P) LTD. [ 2017 (3) TMI 1266 - DELHI HIGH COURT] once the ITAT sends a copy of an order to the Principal CIT / CIT and even the CIT (Judicial), going by the details as provided to it in the memo of parties and even if, therefore, there is a change concerning the jurisdiction of the CIT, it will not have the effect of postponing the commencing of the period of limitation in terms of section 260A(2)(a) of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court while further answering the question No. (vii) has held that where there is a common order of the ITAT covering the several appeals, the limitation would begin to run when a certified copy is received first by either the CIT (Judicial) or one of the officers of the Department and not only when the CIT concerned receives it. The issue is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. The penalty order in this case has been passed beyond the period of limitation, hence, the same is void ab initio and the same is accordingly set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee. - IT(SS) No. 01/CHD/2019 (Assessment Year : 2001-02) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was after completion of the two years from the end of the financial year in which the order of the ITAT was received by the Department, whereas, as per the limitation period prescribed under the provisions of section 158BFA(3)(c) of the Act, the penalty order was to be passed before the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which the order of the ITAT was received by the Principal CIT / Commissioner. 5. For the sake of ready reference, the provisions of section 158BFA(3)(c) are reproduced s under:- 158BFA (3) No order imposing a penalty under sub-section (2) shall be made,- . (c) in a case where the assessment is the subject-matter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Appellate Tribunal is received by the Princip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is attached as Annexure-1). On 27.10.2016, O/o. the Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Chandigarh, requested O/o. the Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh to send the orders in the case of the assessee directly to the concerned jurisdictional CIT under the intimation of his office. (Copy of letter is attached as Annexure-2). On 27.10.2016, O/o. the Pr. CIT-1, Chandigarh forwarded the copy of order in the case of the assessee to the Pr.CIT(Central), Gurgaon. (Copy of letter is attached as Annexure-3). Further, from the perusal of the records, it is also observed that the case of the assessee was centralized with ACIT, Central Circle-II vide order u/s 127 of I.T. Act. 1961 dated 22.09.2010. Penalty order u/s 158BFA(2) of I.T. Act, 1961 was passed by then DCIT, Central Circle-II, Chandigarh on 28.04.2017 (Copy of demand notice is attached as Annexure-4). For any clarification undersigned may be contacted at 9463063842. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (ABHINAV AGNIHOTRI) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Chandigarh 7. A perusal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ? Does it mean 'received' by any of the named officers including the CIT (Judicial)? Ans: The word received occurring in Section 260A (2) (a) would mean received by any of the named officers of the Department, including CIT (Judicial). The provision at present names four particular officers i.e. the Principal Commissioner, Commissioner, Principal Chief Commissioner, and the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. These are the only designations of the officers who could receive a copy of the order. In the absence of a qualifying prefix concerned , the receipt of a copy of the order of the ITAT by any of those officers in the Department including the CIT (Judicial) will trigger the period of limitation. Q: (ii) Does limitation begin to run for the purposes of Section 260A (2) (a) only when a certified copy of the order of the ITAT is received by the 'concerned' CIT within whose jurisdiction the case of the Assessee falls notwithstanding that it may have been received by any other CIT, including the CIT (Judicial) prior thereto? Is it open to the Court to read the word 'concerned' into Section 260 A (2) (a) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or reconciled? Ans: The decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (supra) and CIT v. ITAT (supra) were rendered in the context of Section 256 of the Act (and not Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act) and also prior to the decision in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie (supra). While the former decisions may not require reconsideration, they require to be reconciled with the latter decision in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie(supra). The decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (supra) and CIT v. ITAT (supra) are of no assistance to the Revenue in its interpretation of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act. Q: (v) After the change of procedure where orders of the ITAT are pronounced in the open, is it incumbent on the Department through its DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a certified copy of the order of the ITAT and should limitation for the purposes of Section 260A (2) (a) be computed from the date on which such certified copy is made ready for delivery by the ITAT? Ans: While there is no requirement for the DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a certified copy of the ITAT, in any event under the extant ITAT Rules, a copy of the order is sent to the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers passed, then the limitation begins to run when such separate orders are received first by any officer of the Department. Q: (viii) Whether administrative instructions issued by the Department for its own administrative convenience can have the effect of altering the time from which limitation will begin to run for the purposes of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act? Ans: Instructions issued by the Department for its administrative convenience cannot alter the time when limitation would begin to run under Section 260A (2) (a) of the Act. To reiterate these administrative instructions are for the administrative convenience of the Department and will not override the statute, in particular, Section 260A (2) (a) of the Act. 9. In view of the answer to question No.(iii) of the Hon ble Delhi High Court, wherein, it has been held that once the ITAT sends a copy of an order to the Principal CIT / CIT and even the CIT (Judicial), going by the details as provided to it in the memo of parties and even if, therefore, there is a change concerning the jurisdiction of the CIT, it will not have the effect of postponing the commencing of the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
