INDIAN FOREST INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJASTHAN vs. CENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALORE

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It emerges during the course of hearing that “situs” of the assessee’s Assessing Officer framing regular assessment does not fall within the territorial juri iction of ITAT Delhi Benches, Delhi. Indian Forest Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2 4. Faced with this situation, I hereby quote this tribunal’s STANDING ORDER UNDER INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 defining territorial juri iction of various benches of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal; as on 01.10.1997 wherein “situs” of the assessee’s Assessing Officer is not covered under Delhi benches juri iction. I wish to make it clear here that not only para 4 of the said STANDING ORDER adopts “situs” of the location of the “office of the Assessing Officer” as the decisive factor in such an instance. We further quote PCIT Vs. ABC Paper Ltd. (2022) 447 ITR 1 (SC) deciding the very issue against the assessee.

I accordingly dismiss the assessee’s instant appeal for want of territorial juri iction of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi with liberty to be instituted afresh before the appropriate benches. It is made clear that delay in such a situation thereof; if any, as on date, shall stand condoned. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 27/05/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)