VOITH HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. ADDITIONAL, JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1725/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 November 2024AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the jurisdictional error and allowed the assessee's application to return the appeal. The appeal was dismissed with liberty to refile it before the correct jurisdictional bench.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with the ITAT, Pune Bench, but later realized the jurisdiction lies with the Delhi Benches. This was due to an inadvertent error in selecting the respondent during online filing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the incorrect jurisdiction of the ITAT bench where the appeal was filed, leading to a request for its return to be filed before the proper bench.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Soni
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Hearing: 06.11.2024Pronounced: 07.11.2024

Assessment Year : 2022-23 Voith Hydro Private Vs. Addl./JCIT (Appeals), Limited, Aurangabad. A 20 & 21, Sector 59, Noida, Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201301. PAN : AABCV5041J Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Rajat Soni Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date of hearing : 06.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 07.11.2024 आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.06.2024 passed by Ld Addl./JCIT(A), Aurangabad for the assessment year 2022-23.

2.

When the case was called for hearing, LD counsel for the assessee appeared in person and filed an application requesting for disposing off the assessee’s appeal as “returned” with liberty to file Jurisdictional benches of the Tribunal i.e. before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Benches, Delhi. It was contended that the jurisdiction as per PAN Data base of the assessee lies with the DCIT, Central 25(1), Delhi, Range Code 46. In support of this contention, screenshot showing jurisdictional Assessing Officer is also attached with the application. It was further submitted that while filing the appeal online, inadvertently the name of the respondent was selected as the Addl./JCIT (Appeals), Aurangabad instead of the CPC, Bengaluru. On account of this error, the said appeal has been automatically tagged to the ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune and accordingly listed before the Bench. It was therefore requested by ld. Counsel of the assessee to return the appeal with liberty to file a fresh appeal before the Jurisdictional Bench of the Tribunal.

3.

Ld. DR raised no objection to the requests of ld. Counsel of the assessee.

4.

We have heard ld. Counsels from both the sides and find that the appeal is filed within time but the “situs” of the assessee lies with the DCIT, Central 25(1), Delhi. Therefore, we find force in the

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →