April 2012
TDS: Jurisdiction of Ao: Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of Income-tax Act, 1961: Assessee assessed at New Delhi having PAN and TAN allotted by AO at New Delhi: Ao at mumbai has no jurisdiction to pass an order u/s.201 r.w.s. 201(1A), treating the assessee as assessee in default.
By K. B. Bhujle, Advocate
[Indian Newspaper Society v. ITO, 247 CTR 193 (Bom.)]
The assessee-company’s operational, administrative and management activities were controlled and directed from New Delhi. The assessee-company has consistently filed its returns of income at New Delhi and has been assessed by the Assessing Officer at New Delhi. The PAN and TAN issued u/s.139A and u/s.203A were allotted by the Assessing Officer at New Delhi. The assessee-company lodged TDS returns at New Delhi. The assessee was allotted certain land in Mumbai by MMRDA for which the assessee had paid lease premium. The Assessing Officer at Mumbai passed order u/s.201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) dated 29-3-2011 holding the assessee to be an assessee in default.
On a writ petition challenging the order, the Bombay High Court quashed the order and held as under:
“(i) Evidently, on the facts and circumstances, it cannot be denied that jurisdiction would lie not with the Assessing Officer at Mumbai, but with the competent authority at New Delhi.
(ii) The petitioner’s contention that the jurisdiction lies with the authorities at New Delhi was brushed aside on the ground that the assessment was getting time barred on 31-3-2011 and it is not possible to transfer the case papers to the authorities at New Delhi. This could be no ground whatsoever valid in law to pass an order us.201/201(1A) when there is complete absence of jurisdiction on the part of the Assessing Officer at Mumbai.
(iii) The impugned order of 29-3-2011 is set aside only on the aforesaid ground. The order shall not preclude the competent authority having jurisdiction over the case from adopting such proceedings as are available in law.”
