Improper assumption of jurisdiction without a proper transfer order u/s 127: ITAT Delhi quashed the Assessment Order
Recently, in the case of Navita Gupta v. ITO (ITA No. 351/Del/2024, dated 30.04.2025) by the ITAT Delhi was dealing with the validity of an assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act where jurisdiction was improperly assumed by an officer outside the original assessing jurisdiction without a proper transfer order u/s 127.
ITAT has held that improper assumption of jurisdiction without a proper transfer order u/s 127 is illegal & quashed the Assessment Order.
Let us have a Short Overview of the case:
Key Facts:
Notice u/s 143(2) was issued by ITO, Ward 38(2), New Delhi.
Assessment u/s 143(3) was completed by ITO, Ward 5(2)(3), Noida.
No order u/s 127 transferring jurisdiction from New Delhi to Noida was shown to exist.
Held:
In the absence of a valid transfer order u/s 127, the assessment framed by ITO, Ward 5(2)(3), Noida was held to be without jurisdiction and bad in law.
Consequently, the assessment order was quashed.
Other grounds raised by the assessee were not adjudicated as the matter was decided on the legal point of jurisdiction.
Supporting Case Law Referenced:
Saroj Sangwan v. ITO (ITA No. 2428/Del/2023) – Reassessment invalid where notice u/s 148 was issued by an officer without jurisdiction; assessment quashed due to lack of Section 127 transfer.
S.N. Bhargava v. ITO (147 ITD 306, ITAT Agra) – Reassessment invalid where new jurisdictional officer proceeded without recording fresh reasons or valid transfer.
PCIT v. Vimal Gupta (Delhi HC, ITA No. 515/2016) – Jurisdictional lapse in absence of valid Section 127 order and notice issued by unauthorized officer made reassessment invalid.
The copy of the order is as under:
