High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench
Motilal Bimalchand Jain (HUF) vs. CIT
Asst. Year 2000-01
A.M. Sapre, J.
Writ Petn. No. 365 of 2005
17th March, 2005
P.M. Choudhary, for the Petitioner
A.M. Sapre, J. :
The petitioner seeks to challenge the issuance of notice under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961, dt. 24th Feb., 2005 (Annex. P11), issued by the CIT in respect of the asst. yr. 2000-01, whereby he has proposed to set aside the assessment order, passed by the AO on 28th March, 2003 (Annex. P6), in exercise of powers conferred under s. 263 of the Act.
It is the case of the petitioner that the notice impugned is totally without jurisdiction. It is also their case that an objection to that effect has been raised by the petitioner pointing out the grounds on which notice can be held bad in law. Learned counsel for the petitioner has attempted to support his submissions on the basis of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court, reported in CIT vs. R.S. Banwarilal (1982) 28 CTR (MP)(FB) 49 : (1983) 140 ITR 3 (MP)(FB) : (1982) 10 ITC 221 (MP)(FB) and again in CIT vs. K.L. Rajput (1987) 59 CTR (MP)(FB) 65 : (1987) 164 ITR 197 (MP)(FB) : (1986) 10 ITC 548 (MP)(FB).
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended by filing this writ petition that either this Court should quash this notice by taking note of the objections raised by the petitioner or in the alternative, the learned CIT, who has issued the impugned notice be directed to decide the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner, as according to learned counsel for the petitioner, it goes to the root of the matter.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record of the case, I am inclined to accept the latter submission urged by learned counsel for the petitioner.
In my view, it is the duty of the CIT, i.e., the issuing authority of the impugned notice to decide the preliminary objection raised by the assessee in regard to the validity of the notice. When the issue raised by the assessee relates to the question of jurisdiction then, it is always desirable to decide the said issue prior in point of time as a preliminary issue before embarking upon the merits or demerits of the controversy. It is only when the preliminary issue is held against the assessee, that the assessing authority gets jurisdiction to proceed on the merits of the case. Accordingly and in view of the aforesaid discussion which alone is necessary for giving a direction to the CIT, i.e., the respondent herein, to decide the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner in his objection dt. 9th March, 2005 (Annex. P12) about the legality of the notice impugned in this petition. The petition is accordingly finally disposed of in limine with the aforesaid direction without issuing any notice to the respondent which is not considered necessary because this Court has not decided any issue against the respondent except to direct for deciding an issue on the merits.
[Citation : 285 ITR 224]