AKASH DEEP SINGLA,GURGAON vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD

ITA 8105/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 January 2026AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment order was bad in law because the ITO did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to issue the notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the returned income exceeded the prescribed limit for an ITO. The Tribunal followed its previous decisions and judicial precedents, stating that a jurisdictional defect in the initial notice cannot be cured.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The core issue is the validity of the assessment order framed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee's counsel argued that the ITO lacked the pecuniary jurisdiction to frame the assessment based on CBDT Circular No. 1 of 2011.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order is liable to be quashed due to the Assessing Officer lacking proper pecuniary jurisdiction to issue the notice and frame the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 119,Section 143(2),Section 124(3),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 19.01.2026Pronounced: 19.01.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Gurgaon’s order dated 11.11.2025 passed in case no. 11089/CIT(A)-3/GGN/2019-20, involving proceedings under section 143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the first and foremost issue of validity of learned ITO, Ward-19(2), Delhi’s assessment framed on 26.12.2019, learned counsel quotes the CBDT’s landmark circular No. 1 of 2011 that going by the pecuniary juri iction of the departmental authorities for the purpose of framing assessment,

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →