SUNSHINE TRACON PVT. LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC-4(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the correct jurisdiction for the appeal lies with the ITAT Kolkata as the assessment order was passed by an AO based in Kolkata. Therefore, the appeal filed before the Mumbai benches was dismissed as not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the Mumbai ITAT against an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in Kolkata. The assessee claimed to be based in Mumbai, and the jurisdiction of the AO was also transferred to Mumbai. However, the assessment order was originally passed by an AO based in Kolkata.
What were the issues?
Whether the Mumbai ITAT has the jurisdiction to hear an appeal when the assessment order was passed by an Assessing Officer based in Kolkata.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.181 citing141 Taxmann.com 332 · 2022 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
A.Y. 2011-12 filed by Sunshine Tracon Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, against the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [the learned CIT (A)], wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 28th December, 2018, passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13(2), Kolkata, is partly allowed.
The learned Authorized Representative firstly submitted that assessee is based at Mumbai, now jurisdiction of the learned Assessing Officer has also been transferred at Mumbai and all the records of assessment are now at Mumbai.
The learned Departmental Representative did not object to the transfer of this appeal from Mumbai Benches to Kolkata Benches.
On careful consideration, we find that the learned Assessing Officer who passed the Assessment order is based at Kolkata and therefore, the Mumbai ITAT does not have any power to dispose of this appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee before us is dismissed as not maintainable and the assessee is directed to present the appeal before the Kolkata Benches of ITAT. The assessee is at liberty to show delay in filing of the appeal, if questioned, the order sheets in the present appeal. The registry is directed to hand over all the paper books filed to the assessee with proper record
Order pronounced in the open court on 19.03.2024.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026