PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 1 vs. M/S CNH INDUSTRIAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Delhi held that it did not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Limited, the Court reasoned that since the situs of the ITAT which passed the impugned order was Mumbai, and the Assessing Officer was also in Mumbai, the appeal could not be maintained at the High Court of Delhi. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal with liberty to the revenue to file a fresh appeal before the appropriate Court within 60 days.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 (the appellant/revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated May 15, 2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bench “K”, Mumbai. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2018-19. The respondent is M/s CNH Industrial (India) Pvt. Ltd. The High Court of Delhi noted that the ITAT order was passed by a Mumbai bench, and the Assessing Officer was also located in Mumbai. The High Court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Limited.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court of Delhi has the territorial jurisdiction to hear an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the impugned order was passed by the ITAT, Mumbai, and the Assessing Officer was also in Mumbai. Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The revenue contended that the appeal was maintainable before the High Court of Delhi. The revenue relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Limited.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2026
The present appeal has been preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 against the order dated 15.05.2023 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench “K”, Mumbai.
Since the situs of the Tribunal which has passed the impugned order is in Mumbai so also the fact that the Assessing Officer was also in Mumbai, we are of the view that the appeal cannot be maintained at the High Court of Delhi, in light of the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 9 SCC 1. 3. The appeal is thus, disposed of with a liberty to the respondent- department to file a fresh appeal within a period of 60 days from today This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:13:30
before the appropriate Court.
DINESH MEHTA, J
VINOD KUMAR, J APRIL 29, 2026/nk This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:13:30
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
