TIRUPATI COAL,MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO,NFAC, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 306/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 August 2022AY 2011-124 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating it was filed before the wrong bench. The appeal was deemed invalid and infructuous due to lack of jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT, Chennai, against a revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur. The assessee's registered address and the order's origin were both in Nagpur.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the jurisdiction of the ITAT, Chennai, to hear an appeal originating from Nagpur. The appeal was also filed with a significant delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Hearing: 14.07.2022Pronounced: 03.08.2022

आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP:

1.

This appeal by the Assessee is filed against the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur – 2 in revision order No. PCIT, Nagpur-2 / Revision – 263/100000155281/2020 dated 19th February, 2021 for the Assessment Year 2011 – 2012.

:: 2 :: I.T.A No.:306/CHNY/2022

2.

At the outset, the learned Senior Departmental Representative objected to the very jurisdiction of this appeal and stated that this matter pertains to Nagpur, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the appeal should have been filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur instead of ITAT, Chennai.

The learned Senior Departmental Representative also referred that even the effect giving order by the Assessing Officer is passed u/s.143(3) read with Section 263 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) by the Additional / Joint / Deputy /Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax / Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi.

3.

The given address and PAN No. of the Assessee are as under:

Tirupati Coal, Block No.5-64, Utkarsh Nirman, Mangal Wari Bazar Sadar, Nagpur – 440 001. Maharashtra – India PAN No.AAFFT 7608E

:: 3 :: I.T.A No.:306/CHNY/2022

4.

According to the learned Senior Departmental Representative this appeal is without jurisdiction and hence infractuous.

5.

We also noticed that none has represented for the hearing but only a letter from the so-called Authorized Representative has been filed which is dated 18.05.2022 as against the appeal filed by the Assessee before ITAT, Chennai on 05.05.2022 and as per Form No.36, the address of the Assessee is as under:

Tirupati Coal, Block No.5-64, Utkarsh Nirman, Mangal Wari Bazar Sadar, Nagpur – 440 001 Maharashtra – India

6.

One more fact that is to be noted is that the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, i.e, revision order dated 19.02.2021 there is a delay of 380 days in filing the appeal even before the Chennai Tribunal, though wrong jurisdiction. However, without speaking on the condonation of delay or any other issue, we are dismissing this appeal as invalid as without

:: 4 :: I.T.A No.:306/CHNY/2022 jurisdiction. Hence, this appeal of the Assessee is dismissed as infractuous.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I.T.A No.:306/CHNY/2022 is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →