Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी यस यस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम' BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.663, 664 & 665/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2021-22, 2023-24 Prasad Polyfab, The Commissioner of Income Plot No.1601, Phase-2, Vs. Tax, Appeal Addl/JCIT(A)-3, B/H Juni Khodiyar Hotel, Chennai. Chhatral GIDC, Kalol, Gandhinagar – 382 329, Gujarat. [PAN: AAUFP-2961-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Appellant by : None (petition by Ld. Counsel) IJथG की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M :
Aforesaid three appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 are against the orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, ADDL/JCIT(A)-3, Chennai [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 01.03.2024, 24.02.2024 & 01.03.2024 in the matter of intimations issued by Centralized 664 & 665/Chny/2024 :- 2 -:
Processing Center, Bangalore u/s 143(1) of the Act on 30.12.2021, 02.11.2022 & 08.03.2023, respectively.
When these appeals were taken up for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the jurisdiction of the case lies with Assessing Officer at Gujarat. As per Rule 4 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read with paragraph 4 of Notification No.FNo.63-AD(AT/97), dated 16th September, 1997 as amended from time to time, the ordinary jurisdiction of the Bench of the Tribunal to decide an appeal is to be determined by the location of the office of the A.O. Therefore, the assessee was called upon to make submission on the maintainability of the appeal.
In response, the Ld. A.R submitted that its appeal may be transferred to ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench, Gujarat and in case the Hon’ble Bench is of opinion that it is not a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction for transfer of its appeals then, one opportunity may be granted to re-file the appeals condoning the delay.
We find that the Assessing Officer of the firm is ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar, which is located at Gujarat. As per Rule 4 of Income 664 & 665/Chny/2024 :- 3 -:
Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read with paragraph 4 of Notification No.FNo.63-AD(AT/97), dated 16th September, 1997 issued inconsonance with the extant rule, the jurisdiction of Bench which can decide the appeal is to be determined by the location of the A.O and in the instant proceeding the appeals should have been filed before ITAT, Ahmadabad Bench not in ITAT, Chennai Bench. It is also in consonance with the view expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. ABC Papers Ltd. [2022] 289 taxmann 150 (SC).
In view of the aforesaid, we hold that the present appeals are not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction, hence are dismissed.
However, keeping in view of the fact that the assessee has filed the appeals under the bonafide belief that the appeals are maintainable in Chennai Bench since, the first appellate authority, which has disposed of assessee’s appeal is located in Chennai. We grant liberty to the assessee to file fresh appeals before ITAT, Ahmadabad Bench, Gujarat along with petition seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeals. With the aforesaid reasons, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. , 664 & 665/Chny/2024 :- 4 -:
In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 12th June, 2024. (यस यस िव"ने" रिव) (जगदीश) (Jagadish) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य /Accountant Member सद"य सद"य / Judicial Member "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 12th June, 2024. EDN/-