Law:

Section:

High court-jurisdiction in writ-Petitioner-company originally assessed at kakinada in usual course-ITO, kakinada reopened assessment and served notice under section 148 on assessee at its office at chagallu although its administrative office situated at madras-Whether high court of madras had jurisdiction to entertain writ petition challenging validity of impugned notice and reassessment proceedings-Held, on facts, no Facts The petitioner-company was on the file of the ITO, Kakinada and had been assessed for the assessment year 1973-74 in the usual course. For reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1973-74, the ITO served a notice under section 148 (at the same address as given in the assessment order) on the petitioner at its office at Chagallu although its administrative office was situated at Madras. On writ petition, challenging the validity of the notice and the said reassessment proceedings, revenue contended that this Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition as no part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. Held 1. Section 124( 1), defining the ITO's jurisdiction, provides that the ITO shall perform his functions in respect of specified areas or persons or classes of persons or incomes or classes of income or of such other cases or classes of cases as the Commissioner may direct. Section 124(3) enacts that within the limits of the area assigned to him, the ITO shall have jurisdiction in respect of any person carrying on a business or profession, if the place at which he carries on his business or profession is situate within the area, or where his business or profession is carried on in more places than one, if the principal place of his business or profession is situate within the area. The ITO, Kakinada, indisputably had the area jurisdiction over the petitioner, as its factory was situated in Chagallu which fell within his area and only on that basis the assessments had all along been made on it. Since the notice had been issued from Kakinada to a person within the jurisdiction of the ITO, Kakinada, on whose file the petitioner was borne, no part of the cause of action could be said to arise within the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492