CIT Vs. SOHAN LAL SEWA RAM JAGGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') arises out of the order dated 25 -5 -2004 passed by the Tribunal, Lucknow in respect of the assessment year 1993 -94.

(2.) THE appeal has been admitted vide order dated 17 -11 -200.4. Only one substantial question of law has been framed in the memo of appeal, which is as follows: Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in annulling the assessment on the ground that the assessing officer completing the assessment did not have the jurisdiction over the case without appreciating that the assessee had not challenged the jurisdiction of the said assessing officer within one month of the receipt of notice under Section 143(2)/142(1) as required under Section 124(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

(3.) WE have heard Sri D.D. Chopra, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the revenue and Sri Rohit Nandan Shukla, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent assessee. Sri D.D. Chopra has submitted that in view of the specific provisions of Sub -section (3) of Section 124 of the Act, the objection regarding jurisdiction should have been raised within 30 days from the date of service of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and in the present case no such objection having been raised within the stipulated period, the respondent assessee could not have raised any such objection beyond that period. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has not dealt with the specific finding given by the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue. According to him, the order of the Tribunal is erroneous and contrary to law.