By TIOL News Service

ALLAHABAD, AUG 16, 2018: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE BENCH IS - Whether the term 'Joint Commissioner of Income Tax' u/s 2(28C) of the Act also includes the rank of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax within its scope. YES IS THE VERDICT.

Consequently, the bench further held that both officer ranks are capable of sanctioning issue of notice u/s 148 to an assessee.

Facts of the case

The assessee sold two pieces of land, which was being held by him as well as 21 co-owners. He received about Rs 2.3 lakhs as his share in both properties. As the assessee did not file any returns for the relevant AY, the AO issued notice u/s 148. In response, the assessee declared the sale proceeds but claimed them to be income arising from sale of agricultural land and further claimed such income to be exempted. On assessment, the AO accepted only a small portion of such proceeds to be agricultural income and proceeded to treat the remaining amount as Long Term Capital Gain. Such findings were upheld by the CIT(A). Later, the Tribunal too dismissed the assessee's appeal.

On appeal, the High Court held that,

++ the only contention raised by the counsel for the assessee is that the notice was not issued with the prior sanction of the Joint Commissioner, but sanction was accorded by the Additional Commissioner and, therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act issued by the A.O. was without jurisdiction;

++ section 2 of the Act is Definitions Section. Clause (28C) of Section 2 of the Act defines the word "Joint Commissioner" and explains it means a person appointed to be a Joint Commissioner of Income Tax or an Additional Commissioner of Income Tax under sub-section (1) of Section 117;

++ thus, the Joint Commissioner includes an Additional Commissioner as well. There is no merit in the present appeal.

(See 2018-TIOL-1634-HC-ALL-IT)