M/S CHESLIND TEXTILES LTD(MERGED WITH RSWM LTD)),NOIDA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3973/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 February 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL 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 held that the jurisdiction of the appeal lies with the Bangalore Tribunal, not the Delhi Tribunal, based on the location of the Assessing Officer as per Supreme Court's decision in PCIT vs ABC Papers Ltd. Therefore, both appeals are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

These are cross appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee against an order of the CIT(A) for assessment year 2013-14. The assessment was framed by the ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Bangalore.

What were the issues?

Whether the Delhi Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear appeals when the Assessing Officer is located in Bangalore.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Respondent: MS. MEENAKSHI DOHARE, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 26/11/2025Pronounced: 26/11/2025

O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A. M.:

1.

These are cross appeals filed by the revenue as well as assessee arises out of the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-30,) [hereinafter referred as CIT(A)], New Delhi dated 23.1.2025 relevant to assessment year 2013-14 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 31.3.2016 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Bangalore. (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

At the threshold, we noted that the assessment for the assessment year 2013-14 has been framed by the ITO, Ward 2(1)(1), Bangalore. Hence both the cross appeals should have been filed by the Revenue as well as Assessee before the Bangalore Tribunal and not before Delhi Tribunal in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs ABC Papers Ltd reported in 141 taxmann.com 332 (SC) wherein, it was held that the Tribunal’s jurisdiction would depend upon the place where the Assessing Officer is situated. Accordingly, we deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss both the appeals in Delhi Tribunal for want of jurisdiction with liberty given to the Revenue as well as Assessee to prefer their fresh appeals before the Bangalore Tribunal, if so desired and advised. With these observations, the grounds raised by the Revenue and Assessee are hereby dismissed in the aforesaid terms.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →