INDIAN OIL ADANI VENTURES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIA OILTANKING LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1480/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 July 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC lacked jurisdiction to decide the appeal based on a CBDT notification that assigned specific jurisdictions to Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals) for transfer pricing cases. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the NFAC was unsustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an assessment order that included additions made by the Assessing Officer pursuant to a Transfer Pricing Officer's order. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) passed an order that partly allowed the appeal.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the NFAC had the correct jurisdiction to decide the appeal, given the specific allocation of powers by the CBDT to other Commissioners for transfer pricing matters.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 120,Section 250,Section 92CA,Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 246A,Section 248

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti B Patel, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, SR. D.R
Hearing: 15.07.2026Pronounced: 15.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1480/M/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Indian Oil Adani Ventures NFAC, Delhi (present Ltd. (formerly known as jurisdictional Assessing Indian Oiltanking Limited), Officer: Asst. 103, 1st Floor, Spectra, Commissioner of Hiranandani Gardens, Powai. Income-tax Circle- Vs. PAN – AAACI6794E 15(1)(2), Mumbai), First Floor, Room no. 126, Aayakar Bhawan, Churchgate, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Ms. Vasanti B Patel, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, SR. D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 01.12.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short, the “Ld. Commissioner”], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short, the “Act”], for A.Y. 2017-18.

2 ITA No. 1480/M/2026 Indian Oil Adani Ventures Ltd.

2.

In this case, the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Act was passed on 30.06.2021 by the Assessing Officer [in short, the “AO”], pursuant to the order dated 28.01.2021 passed by the Transfer Pricing Officer [in short, the “TPO”] under section 92CA(3) of the Act.

3.

The Assessee, thus being aggrieved, challenged the assessment order and the additions of Rs.4,17,20,863/- and Rs.5,69,58,079/- made by the Ld. AO, by filing the first appeal electronically before the Ld. Commissioner.

4.

The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Kottayam, thus, vide impugned order, decided the said appeal filed on 20.08.2021 and ultimately partly allowed the same.

5.

The Assessee, hence being aggrieved, has preferred instant appeal.

6.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record and considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, vide Notification dated 13.10.2022, the CBDT entrusted the powers/jurisdiction to the respective Ld. Commissioners having jurisdiction of particular areas, to decide the cases assigned to them, as per jurisdiction assigned in view of said circular. The relevant portion of the Notification reads as under:

4.

Now, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) read with sub-section (3) of section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) specified in column (2) of the Schedule annexed hereto, having their headquarters at the places specified in corresponding entries in column (3) of the Schedule, shall exercise the powers and perform the functions in respect of appeals arising under section 246A and 248 of the Act, filed in cases of classes of cases specified in column (5) of

3 ITA No. 1480/M/2026 Indian Oil Adani Ventures Ltd.

the Schedule and falling within the jurisdiction of the Income-tax authorities specified in column (4) of the Schedule:

Sr. Designation Head- Income-tax Cases or Classes of cases no of Income- quarter Authorities tax s Appellate Authority

1.

Commissio Mumba All Principal All cases where order has been passed by ner of i Commissioners/ a Transfer Pricing Officer under Income-tax Commissioner Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer (Appeals), of Income-tax Pricing)-1, Mumbai and one or more Mumbai-55 of Mumbai grounds of appeal relate to Arm’s length Region price under Chapter X of Income-tax Act, 1961 and related penalties.

Commissioner All cases and related penalties of Income Tax (International Taxation)-1, Mumbai

2.

Commissio Mumba All Principal All cases where order has been passed by ner of i Commissioners/ a Transfer Pricing Officer under Income-tax Commissioner Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer (Appeals), of Income-tax Pricing)-2, Mumbai and one or more Mumbai 56 of Mumbai grounds of appeal relate to Arm’s length Region price under Chapter X of Income-tax Act, 1961 and related penalties.

Commissioner All cases and related penalties of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2, Mumbai

3.

Commissio Mumba All Principal All cases where order has been passed by ner of i Commissioners/ a Transfer Pricing Officer under Income-tax Commissioner Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer (Appeals), of Income-tax Pricing)-3, Mumbai and one or more Mumbai-57 of Mumbai grounds of appeal relate to Arm’s length Region price under Chapter X of Income-tax Act, 1961 and related penalties.

Commissioner All cases and related penalties of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

4.

Commissio Mumba All Principal All cases where order has been passed by ner of i Commissioners/ a Transfer Pricing Officer under Income-tax Commissioner Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer (Appeals), of Income-tax Pricing)-4, Mumbai and one or more Mumbai – of Mumbai grounds of appeal relate to Arm’s length 58 Region price under Chapter X of Income-tax Act, 1961 and related penalties.

4 ITA No. 1480/M/2026 Indian Oil Adani Ventures Ltd.

Commissioner All cases and related penalties of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

5.

.... …. …. ….

… …. …. …. ….

14.

The Chenna All Principal All cases where order has been passed by Commissio i Commissioner/ the Transfer Pricing Officer under ner of Commissioner Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer Income-tax of Income-tax pricing), Chennai and one or more (Appeals), of Tamil Nadu grounds of appeal relate to Arm’s length Chennai- and Puducherry price under Chapter X of Income-tax Act, 16 Region 1961 and related penalties.

Commissioner All cases and related penalties of Income-tax (IT), Chennai

This notification shall come into force with effect from the date of its publication in Official Gazette. 7. The CBDT thus, by exercising the powers conferred under sub-section (1) read with sub-section (3) of section 120 of the Act, vide the circular {supra} specifically directed the Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), Mumbai-55, 56, 57 and 58, to exercise the powers and perform the functions in respect of the cases, wherein the orders had been passed by the respective Transfer Pricing Officers under the Commissioners of Income- tax (Transfer Pricing)-1 to 4, Mumbai, and if one or more grounds of appeal related to the determination of the arm’s length price under Chapter X of the Act and the related penalties.

8.

Thus, in this case, the Ld. Commissioner, who passed the impugned order lacked jurisdiction over the appeal of the Assessee in view of the specific jurisdiction assigned to the respective Commissioner by the CBDT, vide the aforesaid Notification. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the Ld. Commissioner without jurisdiction is unsustainable and thus liable to be set aside.

5 ITA No. 1480/M/2026 Indian Oil Adani Ventures Ltd.

9.

Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, for the just and proper adjudication of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner having jurisdiction, or to whom the jurisdiction has been entrusted by the CBDT in terms of the aforesaid Notification, for adjudication afresh. Suffice it to say that the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunities of being heard to the parties before deciding the appeal in accordance with law.

10.

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANKIT SWARNKAR) Private Secretary Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order

Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 120

All 212 judgments and leading authorities on Section 120 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →