DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. BARCLAYS GLOBAL SERVICE CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2823 & 2897/PUN/2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2009-10 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Barclays Global Service Centre Private Limited, 5 to 12 Floor (Part), Building G2 Gera Commerzone Sez, Survey No.65, Kharadi, Vadgaon Sheri, S.O. Pune City, Pune- 411014. PAN : AADCR6251L Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Shri Mallikarjun Utture Assessee by : Shri Rajat Soni Date of hearing : 11.03.2026 Date of pronouncement : 05.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: Both the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the separate orders dated 22.09.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2011-12 respectively.

2 ITA Nos.2823 & 2897/PUN/2025 2. Since identical facts and common issues are involved in both the above captioned appeals of the Revenue, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. 3. The Revenue is in appeals against the separate impugned order dated 22.09.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for assessment years 2009-10 and 2011-12 respectively. At the outset of hearing of both the appeals of the Revenue, Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is situated at Chennai and therefore, the jurisdiction to hear these appeals lies with ITAT Chennai. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue also supported the contention of Ld. AR and accordingly requested before the Bench either to transfer these appeals to ITAT Chennai or to give liberty to the Revenue to file these appeals before ITAT Chennai. 4. Respectfully following the judgement passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘PCIT Vs ABC Paper Ltd.’ reported in [2022] 447 ITR 1 (SC) [Equivalent Citation 141 Taxmann.com 332 (SC)] wherein it was held that, the ‘situs of the assessing officer’ is the only key factor for determining the jurisdiction of appellate forum irrespective of any administrative order passed u/s 127 of the IT Act in relation to transfer of cases.

3 ITA Nos.2823 & 2897/PUN/2025 5. In view of aforesaid judicial precedent and in the light of coordinate bench decisions already passed in the case of instant assessee in ITA No.1222/PUN/2023 for A.Y. 2009-10 order dated 15.04.2024 involving the assessment passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the IT Act, wherein the Revenue approached before this Tribunal and under identical facts the appeals of the Revenue were dismissed, however liberty was granted to the Revenue to file appeal before appropriate bench by observing as under :- “5. In view of aforestated judicial precedent, since the situs of the Ld. AO who framed the assessment is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Tribunal, therefore without offering our comments on threefold issue dilated at para 3 hereinbefore, we deem it fit to dismiss the present appeal of the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee as are not maintainable, however with leave to file them before appropriate bench of the Tribunal which exercises the jurisdiction over the Ld. AO who framed the assessment. Ergo ordered accordingly. 6. In result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross-Objection of the assessee stands DISMISSED in above terms.” 6. Respectfully following the above coordinate bench decision passed in the case of assessee itself, we deem it appropriate to give liberty to Revenue to file these appeals before appropriate bench of the Tribunal and accordingly dismiss these appeals of the Revenue as not maintainable. Since the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer of the instant assessee is situated at Chennai and the impugned assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the IT Act for

4 ITA Nos.2823 & 2897/PUN/2025 A.Y. 2009-10 and order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the IT Act for A.Y. 2011-12 respectively were also passed by Ld. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Chennai. Accordingly, both the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as not maintainable, however liberty is granted to the Revenue to file these appeals before appropriate bench of the Tribunal. 7. In the result, both the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on this 05th day of May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 05th May, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Sujeet Kumar Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.05.06 11:28:58 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.