MITALI GUPTA SHAIKH,PUNE vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 136/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 May 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 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 observed that the assessee's PAN was based in Pune, Maharashtra, and the assessee's address in the return of income also indicated Pune. Despite this, the appeal was filed before the Jaipur Benches, which lacked territorial jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed the appeal on grounds of delay and upheld an addition of Rs. 38,38,750. The assessee claimed this amount was a retirement benefit exempt under Section 10. The assessee also contended that a revised return was not considered by the AO and that they were not given an opportunity to be heard on merits.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the territorial jurisdiction of the Jaipur Benches to hear the appeal, given the assessee's PAN and address were in Pune. A secondary issue was the merits of the appeal concerning the addition and the opportunity for a hearing on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 10,Section 119(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR

For Appellant: Mr. S. L. Jain, Adv. &, Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Adv., Ld. ARs
Hearing: 08/05/2025Pronounced: 08/05/2025

PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated 05.12.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

1.

1. 1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay in filing an appeal. 2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC erred in upholding the addition of Rs.

38,38,750/-, being income received by the appellant as retirement benefit which is an exempt income u/s. 10 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. 3) The learned Assessing Officer has not taken into account the revised /corrected return of income filed u/s. 119(2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Ack. no. 472324380080519, filing date May 8, 2019). The original ITR was defective due to an inadvertent error. The appellant erroneously included the 'Income exempt under Section 10 of other allowances', under the head "Salary". 4) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC erred in not granting an opportunity of being heard on the basis of merits of the case. Hence, we seek another opportunity of being heard before CIT (A), NFAC on the basis of merits in the interest of natural justice. 5) Appellant craves leave to add, amend, withdraw or delete the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings in the interest of natural justice.”

2. In this matter it is brought to our notice by the Ld. DR., that the PAN of the assessee appellant is based at Maharashtra, i.e. with the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(4), Pune. We have gone through the record available before us and it is observed that the submission of the Ld. DR. is correct as far as PAN of the assessee appellant is concerned.

3.

The assessee herself has shown address of Pune in the return of income of filed vide intimation issued by the CPC, Bengaluru and Mumbai vide order of the ADDL./JCIT (A)-2, Noida. Still, the appeal is being filed before the Jaipur Benches of the Tribunal, which is against the territorial jurisdiction assigned to this bench.

4.

In view of these facts, the registry is directed to transfer the matter to the appropriate bench at Pune for further action and appropriate hearing on the matter.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 5.

The Order is pronounced in the open court on the 8th day of May 2025.

More judgments on Section 10

All 591 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →