GURDEV SINGH,SBS NAGAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 308/ASR/2016Status: HeardITAT Amritsar21 August 2023AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and the cross-objection filed by the revenue. This was done with liberty to revive the appeal upon completion of pending jurisdictional actions.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee requested an adjournment, stating they had shifted jurisdiction and the ITAT-Amritsar was no longer binding. The tribunal rejected the adjournment request.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the jurisdiction of the ITAT-Amritsar to hear the appeal due to the assessee's change of residence. The tribunal also considered the pending jurisdictional actions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 02.08.2023Pronounced: 21.08.2023

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.308/Asr/2016
C.O. 15/Asr/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per: Anikesh Banerjee, J.M.: The instant appeal of assessee and cross objection of the revenue were filed against the order of the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-1,[in brevity ‘the PCIT’] order passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Ys. 2011-12. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Nawanshahr (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

2.

When the appeals are called for a hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee. The assessee, Mr. Gurdev Singh, filed the adjournment petition and prayed for adjournment on the ground that the assessee has shifted to Delhi and the jurisdiction of ITAT-Amritsar is no more binding on the assessee. The assessee confirmed transferring the file to appropriate jurisdiction for convenience of hearing. Considering the issue, we rejected the adjournment petition and proceeded to pass the order after hearing the DR.

3.

The ld. DR had not made any objection against the submission of assessee for transferring the jurisdiction.

4.

The issue of change of jurisdiction is till pending as per information from Registry. In our view the appeals filed by the assesseeare liable to be abated with the liberty to the assessee to revive the appeal from the date of completion of pending action.

5.

Thus, in view of the above we dismissed the present appeal filed by the assessee and CO filed by the revenue with liberty that upon completion of pending action, the assessee and the revenue may prefer to appeal a fresh or seek recall of order after fixation of jurisdiction.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →