Aashiyana Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Assessee filed his return of income declaring loss of Rs.10,97,461/-. Return of income was accepted u/s. 143(1). Thereafter, a survey operation was carried out in the case of Shreeji Group of cases, the assessee is one of the group companies. During the course of survey operation it was gathered that Shreeji Group of Companies have received huge share capital/share premium from various entities. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO had issued notices to various parties to verify identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. Assessee allegedly failed to prove identity of few parties. AO made addition of Rs.80,00,000/- on account of unexplained investments. Further, the AO made addition of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of investment made from undisclosed sources. Appeal filed before CIT(A) remained unsuccessful.
Before the Tribunal, Assessee raised an additional ground challenging validity of assessment order as no notice u/s. 143(2) was ever served upon the assessee. Assessee challenged validity of the assessment proceedings as the assessment order has been passed by the AO without jurisdiction. Placing reliance on the CBDT Instruction No.1/2011 dt 31.01.2011 as per which the monetary limit for assuming jurisdiction in respect of return of income filed up to Rs.30 lakhs in the case of a corporate returns is with the Income Tax Officer (ITO). Assessee has filed return of income declaring loss of Rs.10,97,461/-. Therefore, the assessment order should have been passed by the ITO, whereas, in the case of the assessee, the assessment order has been passed by the DCIT. Thus, the assessment order has been passed by an Officer who has no jurisdiction over the assessee. Notice u/s 148 was issued by ACIT, whereas, as per the monetary limit specified as per the aforesaid instructions the notice should have been issued by the ITO having jurisdiction over the assessee.
