What is PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd. authority for?

The territorial jurisdiction of the High Court and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is determined solely by the situs (location) of the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment.

How many judgments cite PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd.?

181 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd. (447 ITR 1), spanning 2022 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 127, Section 260A, Section 269, Section 143(3), Section 255(5), Section 1961.

PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd. (447 ITR 1)

RAMESH KUMAR BAGRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1) FARIDABAD

ITA/281/2026HC Delhi02 Apr 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…agree with the submissions made by Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent-Department, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 vs M/S ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 447 ITR 1, because citus is as per the seat of the JAO. 5. We, therefore, dispose of these appeals by giving liberty to the appellant to prefer appeal(s) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 6. While disposing of these appeals, we hereby record that these appeals against order of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2025 were instituted by the appellant on…

RAMESH KUMAR BAGRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (1), FARIDABAD

ITA/282/2026HC Delhi02 Apr 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…agree with the submissions made by Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent-Department, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 vs M/S ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 447 ITR 1, because citus is as per the seat of the JAO. 5. We, therefore, dispose of these appeals by giving liberty to the appellant to prefer appeal(s) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 6. While disposing of these appeals, we hereby record that these appeals against order of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2025 were instituted by the appellant on…

RAMESH KUMAR BAGRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1) FARIDABAD

ITA/284/2026HC Delhi02 Apr 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…agree with the submissions made by Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent-Department, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 vs M/S ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 447 ITR 1, because citus is as per the seat of the JAO. 5. We, therefore, dispose of these appeals by giving liberty to the appellant to prefer appeal(s) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 6. While disposing of these appeals, we hereby record that these appeals against order of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2025 were instituted by the appellant on…

RAMESH KUMAR BAGRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1) FARIDABAD

ITA/283/2026HC Delhi02 Apr 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…agree with the submissions made by Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent-Department, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 vs M/S ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 447 ITR 1, because citus is as per the seat of the JAO. 5. We, therefore, dispose of these appeals by giving liberty to the appellant to prefer appeal(s) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 6. While disposing of these appeals, we hereby record that these appeals against order of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2025 were instituted by the appellant on…

RAMESH KUMAR BAGRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (1), FARIDABAD

ITA/280/2026HC Delhi02 Apr 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…agree with the submissions made by Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent-Department, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 vs M/S ABC Papers Limited reported in (2022) 447 ITR 1, because citus is as per the seat of the JAO. 5. We, therefore, dispose of these appeals by giving liberty to the appellant to prefer appeal(s) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 6. While disposing of these appeals, we hereby record that these appeals against order of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2025 were instituted by the appellant on…

SANGEETA KURIAKOS,TALEIGAO vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

The appeal stands DISMISSED as above

ITA 488/PAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 488/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sangeeta Kuriakos Agva Seaface Basement Lane No. 3, Street No.-2, Nr Manipal Hospital, Nagalli Hills, Taleigao, Goa-403004 Pan : Adipk9092M . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer/Cpc, Mum-C(197)(1), Mumbai . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr D. E. Robinson [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Sanket Deshmukh [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 16/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/03/2026

For Appellant: Mr D. E. Robinson [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Sanket Deshmukh [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 127Section 147Section 250

…ssee falls outside the territorial jurisdiction of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’ hereinafter], Panaji Bench Goa. Per contra, reiterating the text from standing order of ITAT issued in 2002 and binding precedence laid in ‘PCIT Vs ABC Paper Ltd.’ [2022, 447 ITR 1 (SC)] the Revenue claimed that, in view of the rule 4 of ITAT-Rules this bench is not even empowered to transfer the appeal to the respective bench of ITAT. To buttress this proposition the Ld. DR placed strong reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in ‘PCIT Vs MSP’ [2023, 454 ITR 280 (SC)] prayed that, the present appeal of the ap…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ALLAHABAD BANK NOW MERGED WITH INDIAN BANK, CHENNAI

In the result, the captioned revenue appeals are disposed of as withdrawn in terms of above order

ITA 1681/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024 #नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: 11.03.2026

Section 143(3)

…i Benches of Tribunal. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs. MSPL Ltd reported in 150 taxmann.com 44, following its own ruling in the case of Pr. CIT vs. ABC Papers Limited reported in 141 taxmann.com 332/447 ITR 1 held that the Tribunal and the jurisdiction of the concerned High Court who depend on the Assessing Officer who passed the order. 3. The ld. AR therefore, submits that since in the assessee’s case, the Assessing Officer who completed and passed the assessment orders dated 28.12.2019 & 30.04.2021 is ACIT, Circle 6(1), Kolkata and e- assessment w…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. ALLAHABAD BANK (MERGED WITH INDIAN BANK), CHENNAI

In the result, the captioned revenue appeals are disposed of as withdrawn in terms of above order

ITA 1675/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1675 & 1681/Chny/2024 #नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: 11.03.2026

Section 143(3)

…i Benches of Tribunal. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs. MSPL Ltd reported in 150 taxmann.com 44, following its own ruling in the case of Pr. CIT vs. ABC Papers Limited reported in 141 taxmann.com 332/447 ITR 1 held that the Tribunal and the jurisdiction of the concerned High Court who depend on the Assessing Officer who passed the order. 3. The ld. AR therefore, submits that since in the assessee’s case, the Assessing Officer who completed and passed the assessment orders dated 28.12.2019 & 30.04.2021 is ACIT, Circle 6(1), Kolkata and e- assessment w…

DCIT 4(2)(1) MUMBAI, MUMABI vs. MAHARAJA BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 8156/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 8155/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. Ita No. 8156/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit 4(2)(1) Maharaja Builders Room No. 640, Aayakar Private Limited, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 4A Vikas Centre S. Churchgate, Mumbai – V. Road, Santacruz 400 020 West, Mumbai – 400 054 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm7464M (Applicant) (Respondent) 3. C.O. No. 60/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. C.O. No. 61/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Maharaja Builders Dcit 4(2)(1) Private Limited, Room No. 640, 4A Vikas Centre S. V. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. Road, Santacruz West, K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm7464M (Applicant) (Respondent) & Co No. 61 & 68/Mum/2026 Maharaja Builders Private Limited

Section 127Section 253Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…ule 4(1), jurisdiction of a Bench is determined with reference to the location of the office of the Assessing Officer who passed the order. 8. The above principle now stands conclusively settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In PCIT vs. ABC Papers Ltd. (2022) 447 ITR 1 (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that appeals against every decision of the Tribunal shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who & CO No. 61 & 68/Mum/2026 Maharaja Builders Private Limited passed the assessment order is situated. It was further decided that even if the case or cases of an assessee are…

DCIT 4(2)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAHARAJA BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 8155/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 8155/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. Ita No. 8156/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit 4(2)(1) Maharaja Builders Room No. 640, Aayakar Private Limited, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 4A Vikas Centre S. Churchgate, Mumbai – V. Road, Santacruz 400 020 West, Mumbai – 400 054 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm7464M (Applicant) (Respondent) 3. C.O. No. 60/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. C.O. No. 61/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Maharaja Builders Dcit 4(2)(1) Private Limited, Room No. 640, 4A Vikas Centre S. V. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. Road, Santacruz West, K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm7464M (Applicant) (Respondent) & Co No. 61 & 68/Mum/2026 Maharaja Builders Private Limited

Section 127Section 253Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

…ule 4(1), jurisdiction of a Bench is determined with reference to the location of the office of the Assessing Officer who passed the order. 8. The above principle now stands conclusively settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In PCIT vs. ABC Papers Ltd. (2022) 447 ITR 1 (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that appeals against every decision of the Tribunal shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who & CO No. 61 & 68/Mum/2026 Maharaja Builders Private Limited passed the assessment order is situated. It was further decided that even if the case or cases of an assessee are…

SHIRAHATTI HALU UTPADKARA SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,AP SHIRAHATTI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT

The appeal stands DISMISSED as above

ITA 385/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 385/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shirahatti Halu Utpadkara Sahakari Sangh Niyamit At Post: Shirahatti, Tal. Athani, Dist. Belgaum-591304 Pan : Aavas8257R . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Abhishek Mirji [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Sanket Deshmukh [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 127Section 147Section 253(1)

…which in law has the jurisdiction 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR though solidified the facts but objected the transfer of case. Reiterating the text from standing order of ITAT issued in the year 2002 and binding precedence laid in ‘PCIT Vs ABC Paper Ltd.’ [2022, 447 ITR 1 (SC)] it is claimed by the Revenue that, in view of the rule 4 of ITAT-Rules this bench is not even empowered to transfer the appeal to the respective bench of ITAT. To buttress this proposition the Ld. DR Renga Rajan placed strong reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in ‘PCIT Vs MSP’ [2023, 454 ITR 280 (SC)] prayed that, the pre…

BAGALKOT UNIVERSITY,BAGALKOT vs. CIT(E), BENGALURU

The appeal stands DISMISSED as above

ITA 373/PAN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 373/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2025-26 Bagalkot University Mudhol Road, Jamkhandi, Bagalkot-587301 Pan : Aaajb1902 . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-1/2, Bagalkot. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Vijay Chhappar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 17/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/02/2026

For Appellant: Mr Vijay Chhappar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)

…Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’ hereafter], Panaji Benches Panaji. The Ld. AR also solidified the Revenue submission. Reiterating the text from standing order of ITAT issued in the year 2002 and binding precedence laid in ‘PCIT Vs ABC Paper Ltd.’ [2022, 447 ITR 1 (SC)] it is claimed by the Revenue that, in view of the rule 4 of ITAT-Rules this bench is not even empowered to transfer the appeal to the respective bench of ITAT. To buttress this proposition the Ld. DR Renga Rajan placed strong reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in ‘PCIT Vs MSP’ [2023, 454 ITR 280 (SC)] prayed that, the pre…