Letter [F.NO. Addl. DIT/INTL. TAXATION/2012-13], dated 19-9-2012

What this is

Letter [F.NO. Addl. DIT/INTL. TAXATION/2012-13], dated 19-9-2012 was issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on 19 September 2012. Its subject is Transfer of PANs of Non-Resident assessees.

What it does

Orders the transfer of the permanent account numbers of non-resident assessees to the officers who have jurisdiction over them. Jurisdiction over a non-resident lies with Assessing Officers under the administrative control of the Director General of Income-tax (International Taxation), but 64,697 numbers on which returns for assessment year 2011-12 had been e-filed were lying with officers having no such jurisdiction. The Chief Commissioners and Directors General are informed of the pendency in their charges and asked to transfer those numbers by the afternoon of 24 September 2012, failing which automatic transfer would be resorted to within a week. The letter annexes the region-wise and form-wise break-up of the numbers.

Why it was issued

A number lying outside the correct jurisdiction causes operational and administrative difficulty — advance ruling reports go out incorrect, and the officer cannot even view the e-filed return, so he cannot examine it for scrutiny selection, survey, deduction monitoring or grievance handling.

Who it reaches

• Non-resident assessees whose files sat with domestic Assessing Officers
• Non-residents whose advance ruling or scrutiny matters were held up by wrong jurisdiction
• Assessees who received communications from an officer without jurisdiction over them

The instrument, as the Board published it

Transfer of PANs of Non-Resident assessees
letter [F.No. Addl. DIT/Intl. Taxation/2012-13], dated 19-9-2012
Jurisdiction over non-resident assessee lies with the AOs under administrative control of DGIT (Intl. Tax). It has been observed by DGIT (Intl. Tax.) that PAN of many non-resident assessees are lying with the AOs who do not have jurisdiction over them.
2. PAN not lying in correct jurisdiction poses many operational and administrative difficulties, e.g. in some cases where AAR report is required to be sent and if, PAN is not in correct jurisdiction, the situation often leads on to incorrect and erroneous report. Similarly AO cannot view the e-filed returns of an assessee if the PAN is not with them. As a result they cannot examine their returns for selection of scrutiny, survey, TDS monitoring, grievances handling etc.
3. Accordingly, a list of all such PANs where the return of income was e-filed for AY 2011-12 and lying with AOs who do not have jurisdiction over non-resident assessee has been obtained from O/o DGIT System. The total of such PANs are 64697. RCC wise breakup of such PANs is attached as per Annexure - A and 'RCC wise and Formwise breakup' is attached as per Annexure - B.
4. The breakup of these PANs as per return form filled is as under:

DISTRIBUTION OF PAN AS PER FORMS OF RETURNS OF INCOME

FORM_NAME
Total of PAN

ITR-1
30042

ITR-2
23876

ITR-3
1944

ITR-4
5670

ITR-4S
674

ITR-5
965

ITR-6
1391

Total
64697

5. I am directed by Hon'ble Chairman, CBDT to inform all concerned CCsIT/DGsIT regarding the pendency of such PANs in their charge and request them to transfer such PANs by 24.09.2012 afternoon or else automatic transfer will be resorted to in a week's time.
6. Please take this matter on priority.
Annexure - A
RCC wise breakup of PANs lying in domestic jurisdiction

S. No.
RCC
CCA
No. of PANs

1
Agra
UP(W)
324

2
Ahmedabad
Ahmedabad
2651

3
Allahabad
UP(E)
217

4
Amritsar
NWR
399

5
Bangalore
Bangalore
6583

6
Baroda
Ahmedabad
1469

7
Bhopal
Bhopal
1257

8
Bhubaneshwar
Bhubaneshwar
217

9
Chennai
Chennai
4132

10
Coimbotore
Chennai
602

11
Delhi
Delhi
6977

12
Hyderabad
Hyderabad
2781

13
Jabalpur
Jabalpur
417

14
Jaipur
Jaipur
1102

15
Jalandhar
NWR
928

16
Jodhpur
Jaipur
846

17
Kanpur
Kanpur
206

18
Kochi
Kochi
1482

19
Kolhapur
Pune
191

20
Kolkata
Kolkata
2299

21
Lucknow
UP(E)
563

22
Madurai
Chennai
389

23
Meerut
UP(W)
1336

24
Mumbai
Mumbai
14480

25
Nagpur
Nagpur
471

26
Nashik
Pune
357

27
Patiala
NWR
1146

28
Patna
Patna
236

29
Pune
Pune
4647

30
Rajkot
Ahmedabad
924

31
Ranchi
Patna
391

32
Rohtak
NWR
1769

33
Shillong
NER
144

34
Surat
Ahmedabad
1436

35
Trivandrum
Kochi
785

36
Vizag
Hyderabad
410

Total
64697

Annexure - B
RCC wise and Form wise Breakup

RCC
Total Of ID
ITR-1
ITR-2
ITR-3
ITR-4
ITR-4S
ITR-5
ITR-6

AGR
324
168
82
4
47
4
16
3

AHM
2651
860
1191
128
329
30
83
30

ALD
217
97
42
5
42
13
16
2

AMR
399
200
90
18
49
11
28
3

BBN
217
136
52
2
23
2
1
1

BLR
6583
4116
1971
87
308
14
8
79

BOM
14480
5369
6655
545
1069
35
224
583

BPL
1257
581
399
33
176
25
27
16

BRD
1469
631
514
141
140
20
14
9

CAL
2299
960
999
51
171
45
38
35

CHN
1482
679
485
118
179
11
4
6

CMB
602
250
230
25
73
8
15
1

DEL
6977
3417
2495
127
545
73
60
260

HYD
2781
1485
1017
70
160
10
20
19

JBP
415
211
73
7
69
26
23
6

JDH
846
450
163
9
128
68
24
4

JLD
928
438
239
57
123
25
38
8

JPR
1102
607
256
49
125
25
17
23

KLP
191
73
58
6
32
11
8
3

KNP
206
124
50
1
22
3
1
5

LKN
563
298
155
9
72
10
17
2

MDS
4132
2044
1629
68
316
12
22
41

MRI
389
152
151
18
61
1
4
2

MRT
1336
866
317
14
97
20
16
6

NGP
471
192
145
7
90
16
16
5

NSK
357
120
154
3
41
8
10
21

PNE
4647
2039
1971
87
355
20
39
136

PTL
1146
653
319
23
100
20
23
8

PTN
236
108
85
5
29
2
5
2

RCH
391
235
114
5
30
6
1

RKT
924
211
425
90
124
19
44
11

RTK
1769
1098
398
19
139
34
33
48

SHL
144
70
32
2
24
5
4
7

SRT
1436
466
555
74
240
39
58
4

TVD
785
448
218
24
89
2
2
2

VPN
410
190
147
13
53
1
6

■■

What to watch

• Jurisdiction over a non-resident lies with the international taxation charge, which is the point to take when a domestic officer proceeds against one.
• The transfers here were administrative and, where not done, automatic — so the officer holding the file may have changed without any order the assessee saw.
• This exercise concerns returns e-filed for assessment year 2011-12 and was to be completed in September 2012.

Where you meet it

When a notice to a non-resident comes from an Assessing Officer outside the international taxation charge and jurisdiction is questioned.

← Letter no. DIT(L&R)-I/DELAY IN SLP/2012-13, dated 19-9-2012  ·  Letter [F.No. 246/94/2012-H&FAC-I], dated 12-9-2012 →