VANSHIKA MOTORS (P) LTD.,MEERUT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6213/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 March 2025AY 2009-10Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Amitabh Shukla (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to frame the assessments as the assessee's returned income was below Rs. 15,00,000/-. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals concerned assessments framed after a remand by the tribunal. The assessee had declared taxable income below Rs. 15,00,000/- in its returns. The assessee objected to the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction based on CBDT circulars.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the assessments due to the Assessing Officer's alleged lack of jurisdiction based on the returned income and relevant CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara&

Hearing: 20.03.2025Pronounced: 20.03.2025

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 6212/Del/2017
ITA No. 6213/Del/2017
ITA No. 6214/Del/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These assessee’s three appeals 6213 & 6214/Del/2017 for Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010- 11, arise against the CIT(A), Meerut’s in case Nos. 300, 301 & 302/2015-16, dated 21.09.2017, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), appeal-wise; respectively.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the assessee’s instant three appeals raise the first and foremost 6213 & 6214/Del/2017 Vanshika Motors (P) Ltd. issue of validity of the impugned “second” round assessments(s) itself framed by the learned ACIT, Circle-2, Meerut in furtherance to the tribunal’s remand directions dated 23.12.2014. As it is evident from a perusal of the case file, the assessee had admittedly declared/returned taxable income of Rs.15,00,000/- i.e. loss of Rs.2,66,088/- in it’s return filed on 14.09.2009.

4.

Learned counsel further takes us to page 6 in the assessment order wherein the assessee had objected to the above Assessing Officer having assumed jurisdiction to frame assessment in it’s case. That being the case, we hereby quote CBDT landmark circular No. 1/2011 dated 31.01.2011 allocating jurisdiction to the “ITOs” only in municipal areas in those cases wherein the returned income was falling upto Rs.15,00,000/-.

5.

The Revenue on the other hand vehemently argues that the learned Assessing Officer had rejected the assessee’s foregoing objections in his order sheet entry dated 18.03.2016 wherein once the assessee had declared loss of Rs.17,66,795/- in assessment year 2013-14.

6.

We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant technical objection going by the assessee’s returned income figures; in 6213 & 6214/Del/2017 Vanshika Motors (P) Ltd. all these three cases, coming to less than Rs.15,00,000/- as it is evident from a combined perusal of the corresponding assessment orders. We thus accept it’s instant first and foremost legal ground going to the root of the matter to quash this assessee’s impugned assessment in light of Krishnendu Chowdhury vs. ITO (2017) 78 taxmann.com 89 (Cal.) for want of the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

7.

All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic.

8.

These assessee’s three appeals i.e. 6213 & 6214/Del/2017 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 20/03/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →