Vinod Kumar Giri Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
CBDT Limits overlooked -Pecuniary jurisdiction of AC/DC ignored – ITAT Kolkata strikes down ITO’s 148 Notice
Assessee filed return declaring Rs 30,88,650. AO, based on DDIT(Inv) information, initiated proceedings u/s 148A & in the absence of reply, issued notice u/s 148. AO made addition of Rs 92,95,020 as unexplained credit u/s 68. CIT(A) dismissed appeal ex parte.
Assessee challenged order by taking legal ground that ITO, Ward-47(1), Kolkata had no pecuniary jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 since, as per CBDT Instruction 1/2011 & Notification 15/2020, non-corporate cases with income above Rs 20 lakh fall under ACIT/DCIT jurisdiction
Tribunal found that it is admitted that returned income exceeded Rs 20 lakh, hence jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 vested with ACIT/DCIT, not ITO. Tribunal relied on Rohit Baid ruling & its affirmation by Calcutta High Court, which held that notice issued by a non-jurisdictional AO is invalid & vitiates reassessment & applied same ratio to the present case. Reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 quashed on jurisdictional ground.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT KOLKATA
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 13.02.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-2019.
