Gauhati HC: DRT Has to Dispose of Application under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act as per RDB Act  ||  Kerala HC: Showing or Waving Black Flag to a Person Cannot Amount to Defamation  ||  Del. HC: Merit Based Review of Arb. Award Involving Reappraisal of Factual Findings is Impermissible  ||  Del. HC: It is the Product and Not the Technology Used that Determines HSN Classification  ||  P&H HC: Provis. of Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen (First Amendment) Rules are Unconstitutional  ||  Cal HC: High Time that Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage be Read as Grounds of Desertion & Cruelty  ||  Supreme Court: Third Party Can File SLP Against Quashing Of Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Absolute Ownership in Property as Per HSA Can’t be Claimed by Woman with Limited Interest  ||  SC: Can’t Forego Fundamental Requirements of Election of Society in Absence of Specific Provisions  ||  SC: Special Efforts Should be Made to Identify Women Prisoners Eligible for Release u/s 479 of BNSS    

Shri Bharat kumar Abhechand Shah vs. ACIT - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (12 Jun 2023)

Person who has been authorized to frame the assessment can only do the same

MANU/IB/0284/2023

Direct Taxation

In present case, the assessee has challenged the validity of the assessment framed under Section 158 read with Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) on the ground that the same has been framed without proper jurisdiction.

The controversy in the present case is limited to decide which authority of income tax whether Additional CIT/ Joint CIT Range-1 or ACIT has jurisdiction over the assessee for the block period in dispute so as to frame the assessment.

There remains no ambiguity to the fact that the jurisdiction was vested with the additional/ joint Commissioner of Income Tax for framing the assessment for the block period in dispute whereas the assessment has been framed by the ACIT. It is the trite law that the person who has been authorized to frame the assessment can only do the same. In the present case, the assessment framed by the authority without having valid jurisdiction. Accordingly, the assessment framed by the AO in the given case is not maintainable and sustainable. Accordingly, present Tribunal quash the same.

Furthermore, once it is held that the assessment framed in dispute is not sustainable as the same has been made by the person having no jurisdiction over the assessee, present Tribunal is not inclined to adjudicate the issue raised by the assessee on merit. Appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   FRAMING OF   JURISDICTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved