The jurisdictional issue was first time raised by the assessee before the ITAT which was admitted by the ITAT . The assessee contended that as per the instruction No 1/2011 dt 31-1 2011 ,when the monetary limits falls above Rs 30 lakh the jurisdiction for the year was lied with DCIT /ACIT and the notice issued u/s 143(2) by the ITO and assessment order was passed by DCIT without issuing the notice u/s 143(2) is held to be bad in law . Tribunal held that as per the Instruction No 1/2011 dt 31-1 2011 when a notice ought to have been issued by ACIT/ DCIT a statutory notice issued by ITO u/s 143(2) lacks jurisdiction and assessment is bad in law . Referred West Bengal State Electricity Board v. DCIT ( 2005) 278 ITR 218 9 Cal) (HC) , Krishnendu Chowdhury v.ITO ( 2017) 78 taxmann.com 89 (Kol) (Trib) , Sukumar Ch. Sahoo v. ACIT ( ITA No. 2073 /Kol/2016 . ( ITA No. 1346/Kol/ 2016 dt .18-3 -2020 ) (AY. 2012 -13)