BHARAT T CHHEDA,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER , BKC KAUTILYA BHAVAN
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRAAssessment Year: 2018-19 Bharat T Chheda, 19, Anesh Baug, J.N. Road, Mulund West, Mumbai Vs. Assessing Officer, BKC Kautilya Bhawan, Mumbai PAN: AABPC1879Q (Appellant)
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National
Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078922438(1), dated
25.07.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Assessee by None
Department by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Date of hearing
26.12.2025
Date of pronouncement
26.12.2025
2 | P a g e
Delay of 6 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 4. Coming to the assessee’s transfer application herein, it emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the first and fundamental issue of this tribunal’s Delhi benches’ juri iction itself since the assessee’s regular assessment juri iction is at Mumbai. 5. Faced with this situation, we hereby quote this Tribunal’s STANDING ORDER UNDER INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 settling the instant issue of territorial juri iction of various Benches as per “location of the office of the Assessing Officer” in para 4 thereof. We also deem it appropriate to refer to hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in PCIT Vs. ABC Papers Ltd. (2022) 447 ITR 1 (SC), settling the issue that it is only the “situs” of the Assessing Officer framing assessment which forms the decisive factor for the purpose of determining territorial juri iction of hon’ble high court. 6. Needless to mention, we wish to clarify here that this Tribunal’s forgoing STANDING ORDER applicable with effect from 3 | P a g e
1st November, 1997 has verbatim adopted the “situs” of the Assessing Officer framing assessment and, therefore, we conclude that their lordships’ detailed analysis would apply mutatis mutandis herein as well.
7. We accordingly decline the assessee’s transfer application thereby concluding that ITAT, Delhi Benches do not have territorial juri iction to decide the same, subject to a rider that he shall indeed be at liberty to institute a fresh appeal, if so advised, before the appropriate Benches and delay caused therein involving the entire intervening period, shall stand condoned.
8. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26th December, 2025 (NAVEEN CHANDRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 31st December, 2025. RK/-