An instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, as F. No. 225/24/2021-ITA-II, dated 23 February 2021. Issued under section 119 read with sections 6 and 84 of the Black Money Act, 2015.
An instruction of the Board to all Principal Chief Commissioners and Directors General. It decides that Black Money Act proceedings pending with jurisdictional income-tax authorities are to move to the Central Charges, and then, using section 119 of the Income-tax Act read with sections 6 and 84 of the Black Money Act, directs that the income-tax cases of the same persons are to follow them there by orders under section 127. Eight lettered sub-paragraphs set out the steps.
This is an instruction to the department's own officers. It tells them how to do something — which cases to take up, what to check, how to record it. It is an internal direction, and its whole force runs downwards inside the department.
All Black Money Act cases pending with jurisdictional income-tax authorities are to be transferred to the respective Central Charges, excluding cases in which an ADIT or DDIT (Investigation) exercises jurisdiction under Notification S.O. 1590(E) dated 16.05.2017. Where Black Money Act proceedings are pending, the person's income-tax cases are also to go to the Central Charges by orders under section 127. The jurisdictional authority must first identify the Black Money Act cases in its charge, then identify every income-tax proceeding in them, including those pending with the National e-Assessment Centre and the National Faceless Penalty Centre, and take those up through the Principal Commissioner so that the case may be returned to the jurisdictional assessing officer before the section 127 order is passed. On transfer, section 6 of the Black Money Act vests that jurisdiction in the Central Charges automatically, and the Additional and Joint Commissioners of those ranges act as assessing officers under it.
The Black Money Act works off the income-tax jurisdiction: section 6 makes the officer who has jurisdiction over a person under the Income-tax Act his officer under that Act as well. Once faceless assessment pulled income-tax proceedings away to national centres, that link came apart, and Black Money Act cases risked being run separately from the income-tax record they depend on. The Board's answer was to bring both back into one place, the Central Charges.
The instruction is addressed to the department's own officers and binds them in how they route cases. An assessee is affected in that his file moves, but the move takes effect through an order under section 127, which carries its own requirement of notice and reasons, and it is that order he can challenge. The instruction binds neither the Tribunal nor a court, and it cannot cure a defective section 127 order.
Dated 23rd February, 2021 and operative from issue. No outer date is fixed for completing the transfers.
The move is not automatic — it needs an order under section 127, and the assessee should check whether one was passed and whether he was heard. Watch the faceless interface as well: an assessment or penalty pending with the national centres has to be pulled back before transfer, and orders passed out of turn are vulnerable. Note the ADIT/DDIT (Investigation) exclusion.
On transfer of Income-tax jurisdiction in such cases to the respective Central Charges, by virtue of section 6 of the BM Act, the jurisdiction for the purpose of BM Act will automatically vest with the respective Central Charges.
— the Central Board of Direct Taxes, instruction F. No. 225/24/2021-ITA-II, 23 February 2021. Read it in the department’s own PDF.
| Under the Income-tax Act, 1961 | Now, in the Income-tax Act, 2025 |
|---|---|
| section 119 | section 239 |
| section 127 | section 243 |
The CBDT rejected my condonation application without dealing with my reasons. Can I challenge that?
Can interest under ss.234A, 234B and 234C be waived?
Our amalgamation was sanctioned long after the deadline for a revised return. Must the department accept revised returns filed to give effect to the scheme?
The AO says I sold below market value and wants to tax the difference. Can he do that?
A Board circular supports my reading of the section. Can I hold the Tribunal or the High Court to it, and can a circular settle what a provision means?
I did not tick s.115BAA in the return and filed Form 10-IC late. Can I still get the concessional rate?
What here is the Board’s and what is ours. The document is the Central Board of Direct Taxes’ own. Its number, its date and the words quoted above are reproduced from the Board’s own PDF, which is here. Everything else on this page is ours: the plain-English account of what the document is and what it does, the reading of which provision it turns on, the note on what to watch, and the choice of cases. Where our account and the document part, the document governs.
An order of the Board binds the department, not you and not a court. The Board writes to its own officers. An assessee may hold the department to an order or an instruction that helps him; the department cannot hold an assessee to one that hurts him, and the Tribunal and the courts decide the law for themselves. This is the most common mistake made with this material, and it is worth making twice: a direction of the Board is not a section of the Act.
What we could not settle. Sections 6 and 84 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 are cited in the instruction; sections lists only the Income-tax Act, 1961 provisions.