ITO 25(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. JEWEL ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In all these appeals, the assessee had challenged the jurisdiction of AO-26(1)(1), who had passed order u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of I.T. Act.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. From the record we found that jurisdiction of the assessee’s case for all these years lies with the ITO, Dhule, where he resides, having salary income received at Dhule since many years from Bharat Petroleum Corporation. The assessee was also regularly filing his return at Dhule. Thus, the CIT/CCIT Nasik had the jurisdiction over Dhule area. However, the CIT-26, Mumbai 2 has no jurisdiction to assign the jurisdiction over the assessee’s case without passing order u/s.127(2) of the Act, and also without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Thus, we do not find any merit in the order passed by the ITO-26(1)(1) Mumbai without transfer of jurisdiction. In the interest of justice and fair-play, we direct the AO/ITO- 26(1)(1) to transfer all these files to the ITO Dhule for deciding all the appeals afresh by considering the revised return filed by the assessee at ITO, Dhule. We direct accordingly.

In the result, all appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 04/12/2015.