Liladhar Ramchandra Patil, Jalgaon V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1 (5), Jalgaon

ITA 1307/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0200 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M.R. SHIRUDE
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1307/PUN/2019 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Liladhar Ramchandra Patil, Flat No.4, Arti Apartment, Behind M.J. College, Jalgaon-425002. PAN : AASPP8009J Vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Jalgaon. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises against the CIT(A)-2, Nashik’s order dated 25.06.2019 passed in case no.Nsk/CIT(A)-2/152/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. I first of all come to the former issue of validity of the impugned reopening for want of the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction. There is hardly any dispute that the ITO, Ward-2(4), Jalgaon had issued section 148 notice to the assessee after recording the corresponding reasons on 30.03.2017. This followed transfer of assessee’s assessment jurisdiction from the above stated authority to Assessee by : Shri M. R. Shirude Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date of hearing : 26.07.2022 Date of pronouncement : 27.07.2022 ITA No.1307/PUN/2019 2 ITO, Ward-1(5), Jalgaon w.e.f. 28.06.2020. A perusal of the case records reveals that the said transfer proposal (page 10 in assessee’s paper book running into 214 pages) suggests that the former authority hereinabove had no jurisdiction in assessee’s case. Meaning thereby that it’s section 148 notice setting into motion the impugned reopening suffered from lack of jurisdiction rendering all subsequent proceedings as invalid. I thus quote (2017) 396 ITR 167 (Gujarat) Shirishbhai H. Sanjanwala vs. ACIT to quash the impugned reopening for this precise reason alone. The Revenue’s vehement contentions supporting the same stand rejected. The assesse succeeds in the instant appeal. All other pleadings on merit are rendered academic. 3. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced on this 27 th day of July, 2022. Sd/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 27 th July, 2022. Sujeet (DOC) आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-2, Nashik. 4. The Pr. CIT-2, Nashik. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.