The applicant has a residential address at Ahmadabad. The notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 at his residential address at Ahmadabad, State of Gujarat. The applicant is assessed to tax at consistently at Cuttack. The return was filed\u00a0 at Cuttack. The notice u\/s 148 of the Act was issued by the Cuttack Assessing Officer.\u00a0\u00a0 The Assessment order was passed at Cuttack. The\u00a0 applicant filled writ petition\u00a0 in Gujrat High Court.\u00a0 Dismissing the petition the Court held that even in a scenario where a part cause of action has arisen within one High Court\u2019s territorial jurisdiction, the High Court can still refuse to exercise jurisdiction under article 226 on account of other considerations as defined under the concept of forum conveniens. Just because a notice under section\u00a0143(2)\u00a0of the\u00a0Income-tax Act, 1961\u00a0came to be issued to the assessee at his residential address at Ahmedabad, that by itself, would not confer jurisdiction on the Gujarat High Court, more particularly, when the assessee was being assessed to tax consistently at Cuttack. The assessee had a permanent account number card at such place. The notice under section\u00a0148\u00a0of the Act, was issued at Cuttack. The return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 was also filed at Cuttack. The final assessment order dated December 29, 2017 for the assessment year 2015-16 was also passed at Cuttack. The validity of the reassessment notice would not be considered by the Gujarat High Court.(AY.2015-16)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 147 : Reassessment-Writ-Territorial jurisdiction of High Court-Cause of action-Permanent Account Number Card having Cuttack address-Residential address in Ahmedabad-Amendment of Article 226 in 1976-The validity of the reassessment notice would not be considered by the Gujarat High Court. [S. 148, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, 20(6), Art. 226(2)] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-7ET","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29443"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29443\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30574,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29443\/revisions\/30574"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}