COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ANJALI DUA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue has preferred this appeal against the order dt. 13th Aug., 2007, passed in ITA No. 4827/Del/2004 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred as the Tribunal'). The case pertains to the asst. yr. 1996 -97.

(2.) THE entire issue is with regard to the issuance of notice under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the 'said Act'). The said notice was issued on 28th March, 2003, by the then ITO, Ludhiana. It was the contention of the assessee that the said notice was without jurisdiction, inasmuch as the assessee had shifted from Ludhiana to New Delhi in July 1997. The contention on behalf of the Revenue was that the notice under Section 148 of the said Act pertains to the asst. yr. 1996 -97 which relates to a period when the assessee was residing at Ludhiana and the assessee had also filed her return at Ludhiana in respect of the said assessment year. It was therefore, contended on behalf of the Revenue that the notice issued under Section 148 of the said Act by the ITO at Ludhiana was not without jurisdiction and was valid. Consequently, the findings to the contrary by the Tribunal have been challenged.

(3.) IT is in this background that the Tribunal noted that the request of the assessee to transfer the Jurisdiction was noted in the letter dt. 25th March, 1998, whereby the no objection of CIT, New Delhi, was conveyed to the CIT, Ludhiana. It is also noted that thereafter the assessee submitted returns for the asst. yrs. 1997 -98 onwards at New Delhi. It is in these facts and circumstances that the Tribunal came to the conclusion that insofar as, the assessee was concerned, after the said transfer, it is only Revenue authorities at New Delhi who had Jurisdiction over the assessee's cases and who were competent to issue a notice In terms of Section 148 of the said Act. It may also be pointed that pursuant to the issuance of impugned notice under Section 148 of the said Act on 28th March, 2003, when the notice under Section 142(1) was issued to the assessee in December, 2003, the assessee by her reply dt. 21st Jan., 2004, indicated that her AO was not located in Ludhiana, but was the ITO at New Delhi.