Preethi Engineering Enterprises Vs DCIT (ITAT Raipur)
The appeal arose from the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC dated 26.02.2026 for AY 2014-15. The principal issue before the ITAT Raipur was whether the notice issued under Sections 147/148 of the Income-tax Act was valid when it had been issued by an Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), although the assessee contended that jurisdiction vested with the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31.01.2011.
The assessee submitted that, in the return of income filed under Section 139(1) for AY 2014-15, the gross total income declared was ₹1,38,829. According to CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011, jurisdiction over non-corporate assessees having returned income up to ₹15,00,000 vested with the ITO. The assessee argued that the notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 for reassessment proceedings had been issued by the ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur instead of the ITO. It was therefore contended that the ACIT lacked the inherent jurisdiction prescribed under the CBDT Instruction to issue the notice and that the reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of such notice were invalid.
The Tribunal examined the issue in light of judicial precedents. It referred to the decision of the ITAT Delhi in Vikas Jhuntra and Sons HUF v. ACIT, where, on identical facts, it was held that the authority competent to issue a notice under Section 148 must be determined in accordance with the monetary limits prescribed in CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011. In that case, the Tribunal had held that where the assessee’s returned income was below the prescribed monetary limit, the notice under Section 148 ought to have been issued by the ITO. Since the notice had instead been issued by the ACIT, it was held to be without jurisdiction, void ab initio, and the consequential reassessment proceedings were quashed. The ITAT Delhi had also relied on its earlier decision in Aashiyana Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd., where a notice under Section 148 issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction was similarly held to be defective and void ab initio.
