Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal arose from an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the assessment was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessee's representative did not appear, while the Revenue argued that the appeal should be heard by the ITAT Mumbai Bench as the assessment was passed in Mumbai.
Held
The Tribunal accepted the plea of the Departmental Representative. Relying on a Supreme Court judgment regarding appellate jurisdiction, the Tribunal held that appeals lie with the High Court within whose jurisdiction the assessing officer is located. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
Key Issues
Jurisdiction of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for hearing appeals when the assessing officer is located in a different jurisdiction than where the appeal is filed.
Sections Cited
147, 260A, 127
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & HON’BLE SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai-48 in order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073392403(1) dated 18.02.2025. The assessment was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Mumbai for the assessment year 2015-16 u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 29.03.2023.
At the time of hearing, ld. DR. Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT for the Revenue pointed out that the assessment order has been passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Mumbai, therefore the present appeal required to be heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai. She further pointed out that the impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai-48 in order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073392403(1) dated 18.02.2025. Hence, she submitted that the jurisdiction of this appeal lies in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench since the assessment order was passed in Mumbai.
None appeared for the assessee despite service of notice.
We have heard ld. counsel for the revenue. We find that the very question fell for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT-I, Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Ltd. (2022) 9 SCC 1. Therein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 260A is exercisable by the High court within whose territorial jurisdiction the assessing officer is located. The Court has held as follows:
“45. In conclusion, we hold that appeals against every decision of 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).”
In the light of above authoritative judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred supra, we accept the plea of the Departmental Representative, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the revenue to file this appeal before the appropriate forum i.e; Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai within 10 weeks from the receipt of this order.
In result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed as withdrawn in terms above. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th day of November, 2025.