THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. M/S P P ENTERPRISES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/133/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01052976202606 August 2026Author: S.G.PANDIT,K.MANMADHA RAO5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka held that the jurisdiction for hearing appeals against ITAT orders lies with the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is situated. This principle remains applicable even if the assessee's cases are transferred under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. ABC Papers Ltd. [(2022) 141 taxmann.com 332 (SC)]. In this case, the assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore. Therefore, the Karnataka High Court does not have jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty granted to file the appeal before the appropriate jurisdictional High Court (which would be the Madras High Court).

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Revenue (Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-1 and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai Bench, dated 09.02.2026, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The assessee, M/s. P.P. Enterprises, is located in Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, with a presence in Bengaluru. The assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore. The High Court of Karnataka raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal before it.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court of Karnataka has jurisdiction to hear an appeal against an order of the ITAT when the assessment order was passed by an Assessing Officer situated within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Madras, even if the assessee has a presence in Bengaluru and the ITAT order was passed by a bench in Chennai? (Question of law turning on Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The appeal was filed before the Karnataka High Court considering the assessee's presence in Bengaluru and the subsequent centralization of the assessment after a search. The Revenue argued that the assessment took place at Coimbatore.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 127

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 133 OF 2026 BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1, 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095.

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT ADDRESS: THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y. V., ADV.)

AND:

M/S. P.P. ENTERPRISES 215/4C1/217/C1, 1ST FLOOR, P.P. COMPLEX, ODDANCHATAM, DINDIGUL-624 704 PAN NO. AATFP 5166H PAN NO. AAPFP 7024C. …RESPONDENT

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI IN ITA NO.3383/CHNY/2024 DATED 09.02.2026 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 ANNEXURE-A AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, COIMBATORE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

This appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 questioning order dated 09.02.2026 in ITA.No.3383/CHNY/2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Chennai (for short, ‘the Tribunal’).

2.

On scrutiny of the appeal, the Registry has raised objections with regard to maintainability of ITA before this Court.

3.

Heard learned senior standing counsel Sri.Y.V.Raviraj for appellants/Revenue.

4.

Learned senior standing counsel Sri.Y.V.Raviraj submits that the present appeal was filed taking note of the fact that the assessee is at Bengaluru and further he submits that the assessment has taken place at Coimbatore, since the Centralization has taken place after consequent search.

5.

From the appeal papers, it is seen that the assessment order in respect of the respondent/assessee is passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore and the ITAT Order is passed by the ‘C’ Bench, Chennai. Therefore, the Registry has rightly raised office objection with regard to maintainability of ITA before this Court.

6.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. ABC Papers Ltd.,

[(2022) 141 taxmann.com 332 (SC)] while considering the identical situation, at paragraph 33 has held as follows: “33. In conclusion, 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 the jurisdiction of appeal. This principles is applicable even if the transfer is under Section 127 for the same assessment year(s).”

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the above decision has made it clear that appeal 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.

7.

In the instant case, the assessment order is passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,

Central Circle-3, Coimbatore. Hence, this Court would not get jurisdiction. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to file appeal before appropriate jurisdictional High Court.

8.

Registry is directed to return certified copy of the ITAT order in ITA.No.3383/CHNY/2024 dated 09.02.2026, on furnishing Xerox copy of the same.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

NC CT:bms

More judgments on Section 127

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →