Inderpreet Singh Jhelumi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
The ITAT Delhi considered an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2015-16 arising from an assessment completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.99,47,310. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS, and notice under Section 143(2) dated 19.09.2016 was issued by ITO Ward-7(1), Kolkata. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order dated 26.12.2017 making addition of Rs.3.92 crore as long-term capital gains, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Before the Tribunal, the assessee raised additional grounds challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and validity of notice under Section 143(2). The assessee contended that the notice had been issued by ITO Ward-7(1), Kolkata, who lacked pecuniary jurisdiction because the returned income exceeded the monetary limits prescribed under CBDT Instruction No.1/2011 dated 31.01.2011. It was argued that for income exceeding Rs.30 lakh in metro cities, jurisdiction vested with ACIT/DCIT and not with ITO. The assessee further contended that no valid notice under Section 143(2) had been issued by the competent jurisdictional Assessing Officer after transfer of the case to Delhi.
