The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has recently, while dismissing the appeals filed before it, held that the jurisdiction of the bench shall be determined by the location of the assessing officer.
The aforesaid observation was made by the Delhi ITAT, when cross appeals by the assessee and the Revenue, arising out of the order dated 03.12.2018, of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi, were filed before it.
When the appeals were taken up for hearing, it was noticed that the assessment order under section 143(3) read with Section 144C (13) of the Act, dated 29.05.2014 was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -10, Mumbai, while as per Rule 4 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read with paragraph 4 of Notification No. F.No.63-AD(AT/97), dated 16th September 1997 as amended from time to time, the ordinary jurisdiction of the Bench of the Tribunal to decide an appeal , is to be determined by the location of the office of the Assessing Officer.
However, the cross appeals in question were been filed, both by the assessee and the Revenue, before the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal. And therefore, parties were called upon to make submissions on the maintainability of the present appeals before the Delhi Benches.
Hearing the opposing contentions of both sides, as presented by Sh. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, the Advocate on behalf of the assessee, and Sh. Rajesh Kumar, the CIT(DR), on behalf of the Revenue, as well as perusing the materials available on record, the Delhi ITAT observed:
“We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. Admittedly, the assessment order which culminates in the present proceeding was passed by an Assessing Officer located at Mumbai. As could be seen, after the final assessment order was passed, the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer of the assessee was transferred from Mumbai to Delhi and the appeal arising out of the assessment order was disposed of by the first appellate authority located in New Delhi. However, as per Rule 4(1) read with paragraph 4 of the standing order/notification issued in consonance with the extant rule, the jurisdiction of the Bench which can decide the appeal is to be determined by the location of the Assessing Officer.”
“Therefore, since, the location of the Assessing Officer in the instant proceeding is at Mumbai, the appeals, necessarily, should have been filed before Mumbai Benches and not in Delhi Benches. This is also in consonance with the view expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT Vs. ABC Papers Ltd”, the ITAT added.
“In view of the aforesaid, we hold that the present appeals are not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction, hence, are dismissed. Accordingly, we do so”, the Coram comprising of G.S Pannu, the President and Saktijit Ray, the Judicial Member held.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
