An assessment cannot be made under a surrendered PAN; the department may initiate fresh proceedings under the new PAN if necessary.

JUDGMENT :

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.)

The petitioner, a creature of statute is aggrieved with the assessment carried out for the assessment year 201920, in its old PAN with the status of ‘Firm’ while the status was changed to an ‘Artificial Judicial Person’ (for brevity, AJP) in which renewed status there was already an assessment carried out; of the same assessment year.

2. The petitioner was issued with a notice on 20.03.2023 for the assessment year 2019-20, as per Annexure-P/4 in its earlier PAN No.-AAIFB2859C; under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, (for brevity, the Act). Simultaneously, another notice dated 31.03.2023 (Annexure-P/5) was issued in its present PAN NoAAAJB1508L by the ITO, Ward 1(1) Patna, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, for the very same assessment year. The notice under the old PAN was issued by the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner, Exemption Circle Patna. The subsequent notice issued resulted in an assessment order, passed as per Annexure-P/6, against which an appeal was filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeals; the acknowledgment of which is produced as Annexure-P/7. Despite the earlier assessment passed at Annexure-P/6 and the appeal filed, having been intimated in the reply to the notice issued at Annexure-P/4; un-deterred, the assessment was completed in the non-existent PAN by Annexure-P/1.

3. Shri. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that there cannot be two assessment orders for the same assessment year. Two PAN cannot be existing simultaneously for the very same entity, especially considering the express bar under Section 139(A)(7) of the Act. Reliance is also placed on Section 124 of the Act. It is pointed out that for the very same assessment year, two different Assessing Officers have exercised jurisdiction over the petitioner, which is also not legally permissible. Reliance is placed on Kai Balkrishna R. Gawade Mandi Vyapari Premises Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit v. Income-Tax Officer and Ors; (2023) 457 ITR 41 (Bom) and Shree Ramkrishna Sishu Tirtha & Anr. v. Income Tax Officer and Ors; (2023) 457 ITR 729 (Cal).

4. The contention in the counter affidavit of the Department is that the petitioner had failed to correct the PAN, in its bank accounts which resulted in the above situation. It is submitted that if at all transactions were found in the old PAN, the correct procedure would be for the Commissioner to invoke Section 263 of the Act and not proceed for assessment by a different Assessing Officer for the very same assessment year, against the assessee, on a nonexistent PAN. It is also pointed out from Annexure-P/10 that even for the earlier assessment year, 2018-19, the petitioner was assessed as an AJP in the new PAN. The Department cannot say that the PAN has not been validly changed.

5. Smt. Archana Sinha, learned Standing Counsel for the Department seeks to uphold the order on the ground that there were transactions found in the earlier PAN, which was not disclosed or assessed under the new PAN. The transactions in the form of time deposit and rental receipts were not disclosed by the assessee in the returns and there has been no response and notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act.

6. (2023) 457 ITR 41 (Bom) held that it was the duty of the Income Tax Officer to examine and verify the contention of the assessee, with respect to cancellation of old PAN and the returns filed under the new PAN, before issuance of the order and notice. Therein, the assessee, a registered cooperative credit society was assessable as an ‘association of persons’ but the present in-charge had applied for a PAN, as a trust. Later the mistake was realised and application was made for a new PAN, which was allotted with the change of status. Despite repeated requests for cancelling the old PAN, the respondent-Department failed to do the needful. A notice came to be issued on the basis of a time