Hillman Hosiery Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)
The appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, arose from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee had filed its return declaring total income of Rs. 39,41,690. During assessment under section 143(3), the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 5.40 crore as unexplained cash credits under section 68 in respect of unsecured loans received from 32 parties and also disallowed interest of Rs. 44,65,805 relating to those loans. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the assessment, following which the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
In addition to challenging the additions on merits, the assessee raised additional legal grounds contending that the Assessing Officer who issued the notice under section 143(2) did not have jurisdiction over the case and that the Assessing Officer who ultimately completed the assessment had not issued any notice under section 143(2). The Tribunal admitted these additional grounds, observing that they were purely legal issues not requiring further investigation into facts.
On the jurisdictional issue, the assessee submitted that the notice under section 143(2) had been issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Kolkata. After objections regarding jurisdiction, the file was transferred to the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata, who completed the assessment under section 143(3). According to the assessee, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer never issued a notice under section 143(2). Alternatively, if the Income Tax Officer was considered the jurisdictional officer, then the assessment made by the Deputy Commissioner was without jurisdiction.
