MIKUNI INDIA PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. CIRCLE-1, ALWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 87/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 June 2023AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction of the Bench is determined by the location of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order, not the location of the faceless assessment center. Therefore, the appeal filed before the Delhi Bench was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the Delhi Bench of the ITAT against a final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The assessee argued that since the order originated from Delhi, the appeal should be heard there. However, the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction was in Alwar, Rajasthan.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the determination of the correct jurisdictional bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for hearing an appeal against a faceless assessment order. The dispute centered on whether jurisdiction is based on the Assessing Officer's location or the originating center of the faceless assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13)

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: ‘I’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

For Respondent: Ms. Mrinal Kumar Dass, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.06.2023Pronounced: 16.06.2023

ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appeal of the assessee challenges the final assessment order dated 27.10.2021 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) pertaining to assessment year 2017-18, in pursuance to the directions of learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP).

2.

At the time of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted, since, the final assessment order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, the assessee has filed the present appeal in the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal.

He submitted, as per the standing order no. 63 of 1997, dated 2nd July, 2013, and faceless assessment, the jurisdiction of the Bench will be decided on the basis of the location of the Assessing Officer. He submitted, since, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of the assessee is Circle -1, Alwar, Rajasthan, the jurisdiction over the appeal of the assessee would lie with the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal.

3.

We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. As per Rule 4 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal)

Rules, 1963 read with paragraph 4 of Notification No. F. No. 63- AD(AT)/1997, dated 16th September, 1997, as amended from time to time, the jurisdictional bench of the Tribunal for deciding the appeal is to be determined by the location of the Assessing Officer, who has passed the assessment only.

4.

In the facts of the present case, admittedly, the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee is Circle -1, Alwar, Rajasthan. Therefore, the Bench of the Tribunal having jurisdiction over assessee’s appeal, will be the Jaipur Bench and not Delhi Bench of the Tribunal. The ratio laid down by the 2 | P a g e Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT Vs. ABC Paper Ltd. [2022] 289 Taxman 150 supports our view.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, we hold that the present appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction.

Hence, is dismissed. However, keeping in view the fact that the assessee has filed the appeal under a bona fide belief that the appeal is maintainable in Delhi Benches, since the final assessment order was passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, we grant liberty to the assessee to file a fresh appeal before the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal along with application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which shall be considered sympathetically by the concerned Bench.

6.

With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16th June, 2023

More judgments on Section 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →