TDS – AO not having jurisdiction cannot pass the order just because assessment was getting time barred – Bombay HC

Indian Newspaper Society vs. ITO (TDS) (Bombay High Court) –  The Petitioner is assessed at New Delhi. The PAN and TAN numbers are allotted to the Petitioner under Sections 139A and 203A by the Assessing Officer at New Delhi. All returns including the TDS returns have been filed at New Delhi. The Assessing Officer recorded the submissions of the Petitioner which advert to these facts and the contention based thereon that the jurisdiction would lie with the Income Tax Authorities at New Delhi.

This was brushed aside only on the ground that the assessment was getting time barred on 31 March 2011 and it was now not possible to transfer the case papers to the Authorities at New Delhi. This, with respect, could be no ground whatsoever valid in law to pass an order under Section 201/201(1A) when there was complete absence of jurisdiction on the part of the Assessing Officer at Mumbai. Evidently, on the facts and circumstances, it cannot be denied that jurisdiction would lie not with the Assessing Officer at Mumbai, but with the Competent Authority at New Delhi.

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY ORDINARY

WRIT PETITION NO. 1504 OF 2011

Indian Newspaper Society V/s. Income Tax Officer (TDS) (3) 4 & Anr.

9 NOVEMBER 2011.

ORDER

Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. With the consent of Counsel and at their request the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

2. The Petitioner has challenged the legality of an order dated 29 March 2011 passed by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2008-09 holding the Petitioner to be an Assessee in default under Section 201(1) read with Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for failure to deduct TDS on the payment of lease premium to MMRDA under Section 194-I.