ITO WARD-2(2), GHAZIABAD vs. RAJESHWARI, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5491/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 June 2023AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) lacked jurisdiction to decide the appeal as it was filed with the wrong appellate authority. Therefore, the order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition made by the AO. The assessee had filed the appeal with the wrong CIT(A) jurisdiction.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) had the jurisdiction to decide an appeal filed before it when the assessee had approached the wrong appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI ]

Before: DR. B. R. R. KUMAR & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Respondent: Mr. Zoheb
Hearing: 14.06.2023Pronounced: 16.06.2023

This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 30/01/2019 passed by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Noida, (hereinafter referred to ‘CIT(A)’ for assessment year 2015-16.

2.

The assessee has raised the following Concise grounds of appeal:-

“1. 1. Ld. CIT(A)-2, Noida has erred in law and facts by deciding the appeal of the assessee without having jurisdiction over the case as the assessee in this case filed the appeal with the CIT (A)-1, Noida whereas the same should have been filed with the jurisdictional CIT(A), Ghaziabad ( copy of jurisdiction order enclosed). Therefore, order of Ld. CIT(A)-2, Noida is non-est, illegal, bad in law and liable to be quashed/cancelled.

2. The Ld. CIT(A)-2, Noida has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 26,22,326/- on account of unexplained investment u/s 68 of the IT Act without considering the facts brought on record. Reliance is placed on judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Udit Kalra vs ITO, Ward-50(1) in & CM No. 10774/2019 dated 08.03.2019 and of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Sanjay Bimal Chand Jain vs. Pr. CIT-1, Nagpur [2018] 89 Taxmann.com 196(Bombay).

3.

None appeared for the Assessee and no adjournment application moved, considering the issue involved in the Appeal, we deem it fit to hear the Ld. DR and decide the matter.

4.

Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment order came to be passed on 27/12/2017 u/s 143(3) of the Act by computing the income of the assessee at Rs. 36,75,560/-/- as against declared income of Rs. 9,74,560/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27/12/2017, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)- Noida, though the Jurisdictional CIT(A) was Ghaziabad.

The said appeal filed by the assessee has been taken up by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-2, Noida) and vide order dated 30/01/2019 the CIT(A) allowed the Appeal filed by the assessee by deleting the additions made by the A.O.

5.

Aggrieved by the order impugned dated 30/01/2019 the Department preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.

6.

The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) -2 Noida erred in deciding the Appeal of the assessee without having jurisdiction as the assessee had filed the Appeal with CIT(A)- Noida whereas the Appeal should have been filed before jurisdictional CIT(A)- Ghaziabad. Further brought to our notice that the Officer who passed the order had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the Appeal filed by the assessee, therefore submitted that the Appeal requires to be adjudicated by the proper authority who is having the jurisdiction. Thus, sought for remanding the matter to the file of CIT (A)-Ghaziabad.

7.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record.

It is not in dispute that the assessment order has been passed by the ITO, Ward-2 (2), Ghaziabad, UP. Any order passed by the Assessing Officer Ward-2 (2), Ghaziabad, UP is subject to Appeal before the Jurisdictional CIT(A) i.e. CIT(A)- Ghaziabad. Since the present appeal has been decided and allowed by the CIT(A)- Noida, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the Officer who has passed the order, without expressing any view on the merit of the case, we are of the opinion that the order impugned dated 30/01/2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-Appeals, Noida is liable to be set aside and the matter is deserves to be remanded to the file of CIT(A), Ghaziazbad to decide the Appeal filed by the assessee afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ordered Accordingly.

8.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on : 16/06/2023.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →