Orchids Diamond Tools Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
The assessee appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-03, Gurgaon, dated 24.02.2024 for AY 2012-13, challenging the assumption of jurisdiction under Sections 147 and 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings were initiated mechanically without independent application of mind, that Explanation 2 to Section 148 did not apply, that valid approval under Section 151 had not been obtained, and that the proceedings were contrary to Section 151A of the Act. The principal contention, however, was that the reassessment proceedings had been initiated and completed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 19(2), Delhi, despite CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31.01.2011 requiring cases involving returned corporate losses or income above the prescribed monetary limits in metro cities to be handled by an Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.
The assessee submitted that it had declared a returned loss of ₹1,84,94,762 and that an earlier assessment under Section 143(3) had been completed by the DCIT, Circle 19(1), New Delhi. Reliance was placed on the judgment in Ashok Devichand Jain vs. UOI and several Tribunal decisions. The Revenue relied upon the findings of the lower authorities.
