HARISH CHANDER KATYAL,AGRA vs. ITO,WARD 1(1)(1), AGRA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal depends on the location of the assessing officer. Since the AO was in New Delhi, the appeal should have been preferred before the Delhi Tribunal, not the Agra Tribunal.
What were the facts?
The appeal arose from an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, concerning an assessment for AY 2011-12. The assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) in Ward 27(2), New Delhi.
What were the issues?
Whether the Agra Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear an appeal when the Assessing Officer is situated in Delhi, as per the decision in PCIT vs ABC Papers Ltd.
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, AGRA BENCH “SMC”: AGRA
O R D E R
The appeal in AY 2011-12, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] dated 30.01.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 25.03.2014 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward- 27(2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).
At the outset, I find that the assessment for the assessment year 2011- 12 has been framed by the ITO, Ward 27(2), New Delhi. Hence the appeal should have been preferred by the Assessee before the Delhi Tribunal and not before Agra 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, I deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss this appeal in Agra Tribunal for want of jurisdiction with Page | 1 liberty given to the Assessee to prefer fresh appeal before the Delhi Tribunal, if so desired and advised, together with a delay condonation petition thereon. With these observations, the grounds raised by the Assessee are hereby dismissed in the above mentioned terms.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed in the above mentioned terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26/11/2025.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Shri Narayan Jan Kalyan Ewam Gramin Vikas… vs ITO Exemption Ghaziabad, GhaziabadAgra16 Dec 2025Dismissed
Also relies on PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.
The territorial jurisdiction for filing an appeal is determined by the location of the Assessing Officer, not the assessee's place of business or residence. This principle has been reinforced by the Supreme Court.
- DDIT(Int.Tax.)1(1), Mumbai vs The Bank of Tokyo- Mitsubishi Ltd, MumbaiMumbai19 Mar 2025Dismissed
Also relies on PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.
The Tribunal held that the territorial jurisdiction of its benches is determined by the location of the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment. Therefore, the Delhi benches lacked the jurisdiction to hear these appe...
- ACIT(It) Circle-2, Pune vs Stantec Uk Limited, United KingdomPune6 Jun 2024Dismissed
Also relies on PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The Tribunal held that the situs of the Assessing Officer is the sole factor for determining the jurisdiction of the appellate forum...
- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Swargate… vs Barclays Global Service Centre Pvt Ltd, PunePune15 Apr 2024Dismissed
Also relies on PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.
The Tribunal held that its jurisdiction is determined by the situs of the Assessing Officer. Since the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment was outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Pune bench, the appeal an...
- Bharat T Chheda, Mumbai vs Assessing Officer, Bkc Kautilya BhavanDelhi26 Dec 2025Dismissed
Also relies on PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.
The tribunal held that the Delhi Benches lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear the appeal, as jurisdiction is determined by the location of the Assessing Officer. The assessee was granted liberty to file a fresh appeal...
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
