SMT. ASHRAFI DEVI SHIKSHA SAMITTI,VILL- BAJADERPUR vs. ADDL JCIT (A)- 9, MUMBAI, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had partly allowed the appeal against an intimation order. The assessee requested the transfer of the appeal to the Delhi benches of the Tribunal, stating it was inadvertently filed before the Mumbai benches.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the appeal should have been filed before the Delhi Benches due to the territorial jurisdiction. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the present appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal was correctly filed before the Mumbai benches of the Tribunal or if it should have been filed before the Delhi benches due to territorial jurisdiction.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 143(1) of the Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
[ Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the order, dated 30/05/2024, passed by the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 9, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal against the Intimation Order, dated 08/03/2023, passed under Section 143(1) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2022-2023. 3 When the appeal was taken up for hearing the Learned Authorized Representative for the Appellant invited our attention to application filed by the Appellant for seeking transfer of the present appeal to Assessment Year 2022-2023
Delhi Benches of the Tribunal. It was submitted that the appeal was inadvertently filed before Mumbai Benches for the reasons that the order impugned was passed by the Learned Additional Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -9, Mumbai, whereas the appeal should have been filed before the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal in view of the facts the territorial juri ictional over the Appellant lies with the Assessing Officer in Delhi. In view of the aforesaid, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Principal commissioner of Income Tax Vs. ABC Papers Ltd. : [2022] 447 ITR 1 (SC)[18/08/2022], the appeal was required to be filed in before Delhi Benches of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed with liberty granted to the Appellant to file appeal afresh before the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal along with application seeking condonation of delay placing on record the correct facts pertaining to the inadvertent filing of the present appeal. In term of the aforesaid the present appeal is dismissed.
4 In result, in terms of paragraph 3 above, the appeal preferred by the Assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 29.11.2024. (Om Prakash Kant) Judicial Member
मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 29.11.2024 Milan,LDC
2 Assessment Year 2022-2023
आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""थ" / The Respondent. आयकर आयु"/ The CIT 3. 4. "धान आयकर आयु" / Pr.CIT 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"ािपत "ित //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार /(Dy./Asstt.
