SURYA NARAYAN SINGH, SAMASTIPUR,SAMASTIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(5), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In this case, the Ld. Counsel for the assesse had assailed both legal ground as well as grounds on merits. That so far the legal ground is concerned, the Ld. Counsel had submitted that initially notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) was issued by the ITO-4(3), Raipur and finally, the reassessment was framed by the ITO-4(5), Raipur without having any order of transfer u/s.127 of the Act from competent authority. In this regard, on earlier date of hearing on 20.03.2025, the Ld. Sr. DR was directed to obtain a report from the concerned A.O regarding this issue. That on the present date of hearing, the Ld. Sr. DR has submitted a report from the A.O and the same is made part of this order as follows:

In the aforesaid report from the jurisdictional A.O, it has been clearly brought out that the ITO-4(3), Raipur and ITO-4(5), Raipur were under the jurisdiction of Joint/Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range- 4, Raipur, therefore, both the A.Os were covered within same range/jurisdiction. So, the order u/s.127 of the Act was not required for transferring in this case.

In my considered view, the department has made a statement at bar on record that as per the range/jurisdiction, since both the A.Os are covered in the same range therefore such order of transfer u/s.127 was not required. The Income Tax Department being a statutory body of the

That so far as the grounds on merits are concerned, as evident from Para 6.1 of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, the matter has been remanded to the file of the A.O invoking powers as per the proviso to Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 251 of the Act (post amendment), wherein the A.O was directed to make fresh reassessment order considering the material facts, written submissions and documentary evidence filed by the assessee. For the sake of completeness, the relevant Paras of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC are culled out as follows: “6. Decision: - I have carefully considered the ex-parte assessment/re-assessment order, statement of facts, grounds of appeal and submissions made during the appellate proceeding. 6.1 It is an undisputed fact that the assessment/re- assessment order was passed ex-parte u/s 147 rw.s.144 of the Act in the present case and the appellant didn't furnish any written submission or evidences during the assessment/re-assessment proceeding before the AO. Now, the appellant has made a written submission with documentary evidences during the appellate proceeding, which were not furnished before the AO and the AO had passed the ex-parte order without having any opportunity to consider these submissions/evidences in the present case. Since the written submission and documentary evidences

The Ld. Counsel for the assesse further submitted that if the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is upheld, the assessee would get an opportunity to represent his case before the A.O. The Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any objection. Considering the submissions of the parties, facts on record and that the assessee had not made any submission nor had filed documentary evidence before the A.O, I do not find any infirmity with the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which is therefore upheld.

As per the above terms grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.