PALLAVI SHRINIVAS DEMPO,PANAJI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE - 1, PANAJI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1485/CHNY/2026Status: HeardITAT Chennai08 July 2026AY 2024-253 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that appeals should be heard by the ITAT Bench within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer is situated, as per the Supreme Court judgment in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. ABC Papers Ltd. The assessee was granted permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT Chennai Benches. The assessee requested the transfer of the appeal to the ITAT Panaji Bench, as the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order was under the jurisdiction of ITAT Panaji.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correct territorial jurisdiction for hearing the appeal before the ITAT, considering the location of the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 127

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 07.07.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], Addl./JCIT, Chennai-3, dated 24.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2024-25.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Authorised Representative (AR) for the assessee submitted that the appeal may be transferred from the Chennai Benches of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to the

ITA No. 1485/Chny/2026 (AY 2024-25) Pallavi Shrinivas Dempo Vs Dy. CIT :: 2 :: Panaji Bench ITAT, as the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is under the jurisdiction of ITAT Panaji, Goa.

3.

The ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the Revenue did not raise any objection to the request made on behalf of the assessee.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Panaji, Goa. Therefore, the present appeal is required to be heard by the ITAT, Panaji Bench.

5.

In this regard, we place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. ABC Papers Ltd., 2022 SCC On Line SC 1036 wherein it was held as under:

"We hold that appeals against every decision of the ITAT shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is situated. Even if the case or cases of an assessee are transferred in exercise of power under Section 127 of the Act, the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer has passed the order shall continue to exercise jurisdiction over the appeal. This principle is applicable even if the transfer is under Section 127 for the same assessment year(s)."

6.

Respectfully following the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and considering that the Assessing Officer is under the jurisdiction of Panaji, Goa, we are of the considered view that this appeal ought to be presented before the ITAT, Panaji Bench.

7.

Accordingly, the ld. Authorised Representative sought permission to withdraw the present appeal with liberty to file a fresh appeal

ITA No. 1485/Chny/2026 (AY 2024-25) Pallavi Shrinivas Dempo Vs Dy. CIT :: 3 :: before the ITAT, Panaji Bench. The request is accepted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the assessee to file a fresh appeal before the ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji, Goa, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

8.

Since the assessee has already paid the prescribed appeal fee before the ITAT, Chennai Benches, in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, no fresh appeal fee shall be required to be paid while filing the appeal before the ITAT, Panaji Bench.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 08th day of July 2026 in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद)या/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद)य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, SANDEE Digitally signed by *दनांक/Dated: 08th July, 2026. SANDEEP KUMAR SNDP, Sr. PS P KUMAR Date: 2026.07.08 आदेश क ��त+ल,प अ-े,षत/Copy to: 16:18:44 +05'30' 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 127

All 1,067 judgments and leading authorities on Section 127 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →