TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer, namely, the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(III) was divested of the jurisdiction on or after 28th August, 2012, the order passed under Section 263 of the Act could not have been given effect to. Tribunal has assigned the following reason which, in our opinion, is both factually and legally correct which says once the order u/s 127(2) was passed by the Ld. CIT-II, Kolkata uncond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.1909/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2008-09. On perusal of the substantial questions of law suggested by the revenue, we find that those questions are irrelevant and are entirely factual as the question of law which may arise for consideration in this appeal would be as to, Whether the order passed by the Assessing Officer namely the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the ITO, Ward-5(3), Kolkata enjoyed jurisdiction over the appellant s case so as to enable him to frame reassessment order dated 25.03.2014 u/s. 263/143(3) for the AY 2008-09. As noted, the jurisdiction over the appellant s case initially was vested with the ITO Ward-5(3) Kolkata, since the territorial jurisdiction over area or limits of area, where assessee s principal office of business was s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted fact that the Assessing Officer, namely, the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(III) was divested of the jurisdiction on or after 28th August, 2012, the order passed under Section 263 of the Act could not have been given effect to. Further, the learned Tribunal has assigned the following reason which, in our opinion, is both factually and legally correct. The same is quoted hereinbelow:- In ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
