ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. ALLAHABAD BANK (MERGED WITH INDIAN BANK), CHENNAI
आयकर अपील य अ
धकरण, ‘B’ यायपीठ, चे नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
ी इंटूर रामा राव, लेखा सद यएवं ीमनुकुमार
ग र, यायक सदयके सम"
BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024
#नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19
254-260, Avvai Shanmugan
Salai,
Royapettah,
Chennai
600014
[PAN: AACCA8464F]
(अपीलाथ'/Appellant)
(()यथ'/Respondent)
अपीलाथ' क* ओर से/ Appellant by :
Shri Sanjeev Aditya, CA
()यथ' क* ओर से /Respondent by :
Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
सुनवाई क* तार ख/Date of Hearing
:
11.03.2026
घोषणा क* तार ख /Date of pronouncement
:
11.03.2026
आदेश / O R D E R
PER BENCH:
These two appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the different orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
(NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] both dated 28.03.2024 for Assessment Years
2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Ld. AR for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the revenue has wrongly filed both the appeals before Chennai Benches of Tribunal instead of Kolkata Benches of Tribunal as the Assessing Officer who
ITA Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024
:- 2 -:
passed the order dated 28.12.2019 u/s 143(3) of the Act is the ACIT,
Circle 6(1), Kolkata and the appeals lies only before the Kolkata Benches of Tribunal and not before Chennai Benches of Tribunal. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs. MSPL Ltd reported in 150 taxmann.com 44, following its own ruling in the case of Pr. CIT vs. ABC Papers Limited reported in 141
taxmann.com 332/447 ITR 1 held that the Tribunal and the juri iction of the concerned High Court who depend on the Assessing Officer who passed the order.
3. The ld. AR therefore, submits that since in the assessee’s case, the Assessing Officer who completed and passed the assessment orders dated 28.12.2019 & 30.04.2021 is ACIT, Circle 6(1), Kolkata and e- assessment whose juri ictional assessing officer (JAO) is in Kolkata.
These two appeals lie only before the Kolkata Benches of Tribunal and not before Chennai Benches of Tribunal.
4. Per contra, the ld. DR for the appellant/revenue did not controvert the legal position and the submissions of ld. AR for the assessee.
5. Heard rival submissions and perused the orders of authorities below.
In the present appeals, therefore, challenges the orders of ld. CIT(A),
NFAC, Delhi which order passed by pursuant to the order u/s 143(3) dated 28.12.2019 passed by ACIT, Circle 6(1), Kolkata and National e-
Assessment Centre, Delhi. Therefore, the present appeals are not ITA Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024
:- 3 -:
maintainable at Chennai Tribunal. Further, respectively following the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. ABC
Papers Limited reported in 447 ITR 1 (supra), we disposed of these two appeals as withdrawn with a direction and liberty to the revenue/appellant to file proper appeals before the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Kolkata within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.
Liberty is accordingly granted to the revenue.
6. In the result, the captioned revenue appeals are disposed of as withdrawn in terms of above order.
Order pronounced on the 11th day of March, 2026 in Chennai. (इंटूर रामा राव)
(INTURI RAMA RAO)
लेखा सद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(मनु कुमार िग र)
(MANU KUMAR GIRI)
यायक सदय/JUDICIAL MEMBER
चे नई/Chennai, 1दनांक/Dated: 11.03.2026
*Ganesh Kumar, Sr. P.S (on tour)
आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ/Appellant
2. यथ/Respondent
3. आयकर आयु/CIT
Chennai/Madurai/Salem/Coimbatore.
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR
5. गाड फाईल/GF
ITA Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024
:- 4 -: