Rajroop Doshi Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
ITAT Kolkata Quashes Assessment for Lack of Jurisdiction: ITO Cannot Assess High-Income Case Without Proper Transfer
The Kolkata Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal of Rajroop Doshi for AY 2017–18, holding that the assessment order was void ab initio as it was passed by an Assessing Officer lacking pecuniary and statutory jurisdiction.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee, a non-corporate taxpayer, had declared total income of ₹47.89 lakh, which—under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 issued under Section 119—fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the ACIT/DCIT, and not the Income Tax Officer (ITO). However, in the present case, the notice under Section 143(2) as well as the assessment order were both issued by ITO Ward-2(3), Kolkata, without any valid transfer order under Section 127.
Rejecting the Revenue’s contention that the assessee had waived the jurisdictional objection under Section 124(3), the Tribunal held that lack of inherent jurisdiction cannot be cured by acquiescence or participation, nor can it be saved by Section 292BB, which only cures defects in service of notice and not a complete absence of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal relied on binding precedents of the Calcutta High Court (Kusum Goyal) and several coordinate bench decisions, consistently holding that CBDT instructions fixing pecuniary jurisdiction are binding, and any assessment framed in violation thereof is a nullity in law. It was further held that, in the absence of a valid jurisdictional notice by the competent Assessing Officer, the entire assessment collapses.
Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the assessment in its entirety on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, without going into the merits of the additions relating to stamp duty valuation difference and brokerage expenses. The appeal was thus allowed in full, reaffirming that jurisdictional defects strike at the very root of assessment proceedings and cannot be cured retrospectively.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT KOLKATA
