PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU - 1, BENGALURU vs. M/S SUPRAJIT ENGINEERING LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS M/S PHOENIX LAMPS LTD)

PDF · subscribers
ITA/460/2022HC DelhiDLHC01003600202017 November 2022Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Delhi held that it has no territorial jurisdiction to hear and decide the present appeal. This decision was based on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax – I, Chandigarh vs. ABC Papers Limited, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1036. The Supreme Court held 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. The High Court clarified that even if cases are transferred under Section 127 of the Act, the jurisdiction remains with the High Court where the AO passed the order. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of, granting liberty to the appellant to file the appeal in the appropriate court having territorial jurisdiction within twelve weeks. The rights and contentions of all parties were left open.

What were the facts?

The Appellant, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru - 1, filed an Income Tax Appeal (ITA No. 460/2022) challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 31st October, 2017 in ITA No. 2845/Del/2007 for Assessment Year 2003-04. The Respondent is M/s Suprajit Engineering Ltd. The Appellant's counsel admitted that the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order was based in Noida, Uttar Pradesh. The High Court of Delhi was considering the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Does the High Court of Delhi have territorial jurisdiction to hear the present appeal, given that the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is situated in Noida, Uttar Pradesh, and the appeal is filed before the Delhi High Court? (Question of law, turning on the interpretation of territorial jurisdiction for appeals against ITAT orders). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue (Appellant before the High Court) contended that the Delhi High Court has jurisdiction. However, the judgment indicates the Revenue's counsel admitted the AO was based in Noida.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 127

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~S-44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 460/2022 & CM APPL.49242/2022 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU - 1, BENGALURU ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Zoheb Hossain, Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Vipul Agrawal and Mr.Parth Semwal, Jr.Standing Counsel. versus M/S SUPRAJIT ENGINEERING LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS M/S PHOENIX LAMPS LTD) ..... Respondent Through: Dr.Shashwat Bajpai, Advocate with Mr.Akshay Anurag and Ms.Sanjana Sachdev, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA O R D E R % 17.11.2022 Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the Order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) dated 31st October, 2017 in ITA No. 2845/Del/2007 for the Assessment Year 2003-04. Learned counsel for the Appellant admits that the Assessing Officer, who has passed the assessment order is based in Noida (U.P.). The Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax – I, Chandigarh vs. ABC Papers Limited, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1036 has held as under:- 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 15/06/2026 at 02:31:00

“38. 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 principle is applicable even if the transfer is under Section 127 for the same assessment year(s).” Consequently, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to hear and decide the present appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal along with pending application is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to file the present appeal in a Court having territorial jurisdiction within twelve weeks. This Court clarifies that the rights and contentions of all the parties are left open. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 17, 2022 TS 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 15/06/2026 at 02:31:00

More judgments on Section 127

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →