Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2018-19 against an order passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. During the hearing, which proceeded ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance, it was found that the situs of the assessee's Assessing Officer did not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of the ITAT Delhi Benches.
Held
The tribunal, referencing its Standing Order (1963) and a Supreme Court ruling, held that the situs of the Assessing Officer determines territorial jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction by the ITAT Delhi Benches, granting the assessee liberty to file it afresh before the appropriate tribunal, with any resultant delay condoned.
Key Issues
Whether the ITAT Delhi Benches had the territorial jurisdiction to hear the assessee's appeal when the situs of the Assessing Officer was not within its jurisdiction.
Sections Cited
154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Indian Forest Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs Centralized Processing H-1/97A, Ricco Industrial Area, Centre, Jaitpura, Jaipur, Bangalore, Karnataka Rajasthan-303704 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACI0426P Assessee by: None Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 27.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2025 ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072241354(1) dated 16.01.2025, in proceedings u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
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 jurisdiction of ITAT Delhi Benches, Delhi.
Faced with this situation, I hereby quote this tribunal’s STANDING ORDER UNDER INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 defining territorial jurisdiction 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 jurisdiction. 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 jurisdiction 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.