Fact of the Case: In case of ITO Vs. M/s. Northern India Transport Company the Appellate Tribunal of New Delhi has held that Assessment Order Passed by the Assessing Officer having no jurisdiction to Assess the entity is null and void.
Brief of the Case: The Appeal was filled by Revenue is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A). In that the respondent assessee is a partnership company. It is engaged in the business of transport under the name and style of Northern India Transport Company, 8551, Gulshan Guest House, 2nd Floor, Roshanara Road, Delhi-07 and has been allotted PAN No. AAFFN0106P. The PAN No. itself shows the assessee is a Partnership Firm. The return of income was processed under Section 143(1) & rectification proceeding under Section 154 of the Act. While the matter stood thus, the respondent assessee company was served assessment order in the name of M/s Northern Transport Company dated 28th December, 2011 along with the notice of demand in original. The respondent assessee mentioned that the assessment order did not belong to him as neither the name & address of the assessee, nor permanent account number belong to him. On filling of the appeal the CIT (A) deleted the assessment and concluded that the name of the appellant mentioned in the assessment order is M/s Northern Transport Company with permanent account number as AABCNI442M. Which is considered as double allotment of PAN to the same entity. The assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward 13 (3) is, therefore, held to be null and void, being without jurisdiction.
Contention of Assessee: the Assessee has contended that the Assessee Company is engaged in the business of transport under the name and style of Northern India Transport Company, 8551, Gulshan Guest House, 2nd Floor, Roshanara Road, Delhi-07 and has been allotted PAN No. AAFFN0106P. The assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward 13 (3) is, therefore, held to be null and void, being without jurisdiction as the PAN mentioned over the order was of the Company and the Name appearing was M/s Northern Transport Company only.
Contention of Revenue: The Revenue was of the view that the appellant that the notices issued by the ITO, Ward 13(3) were never received, the AO in the remand report has averred that two notices-dated 16-09-2010 and 14-12-2010 were sent to the correct address. it is seen that the notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.09.20 10 was issued to M/s Northern India Transport Co. whereas the notice u/s 142(1) dated 14.12.20 10 was issued to M/s Northern Transport Co. It has also been submitted by the AR of the appellant that the total receipts declared by it and the TDS thereon far exceeded those mentioned in the information received by the ITO, Ward 13 (3), on the basis of which he framed the ex parte assessment
Held by ITAT: The Delhi tribunal has held that from the facts of the case it was the case of double allotment of PAN to the same entity M/s Northern India Transport Company, which happens to be a firm and not a company. Accordingly the assessing officer of Range-13 did not have jurisdiction to assess this entity. The firm by the name “M/s Northern India Transport Company” had already filed its return of income for the A.Y. under appeal with the A.O. having jurisdiction over it and has also been assessed by that A.O., namely, ACIT Circle 20(1), New Delhi. The assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward 13 (3) is, therefore, held to be null and void, being without jurisdiction. It has been observed that total receipts declared by assessee and that mentioned in the information received from WARD 13(3) were different. But on findings on above case it has apparently seen the order passed by ITO, Ward 13(3) is held to be null and void. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.