2006 (4) TMI 106 - HC - Income Tax

Territorial Jurisdiction - Transfer of the records - Assessment completed in Bulandshahar and the appeal against the assessment order was heard by the CIT, Meerut - whether the said order of transfer would alter the course of events in so far as the filing of an appeal before the High Court competent to hear the same is concerned - HELD THAT - The test for determining the jurisdiction of the High Court would be whether the assessment proceedings were completed within its territorial limits. Viewed thus, not only were the assessment proceedings in the instant case completed in Bulandshahar, but even the appeals arising out of the said proceedings were heard and disposed of by the CIT (A), Meerut. We have in that view no difficulty in holding that an appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal even though located in - Delhi ought to be filed in the High Court at Allahabad. The fact situation in the instant case is similar to Suresh Desai's case 1997 (9) TMI 94 - DELHI HIGH COURT . The assessment proceedings had been completed by the Assessing Officer concerned and even the appeal stood disposed of before the order of transfer for the pending assessment was made on April 7, 2003. The fact that the matter was pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi on the date the assessments for other years were transferred did not in our opinion, make any material difference. The preliminary objection accordingly succeeds and is upheld. The appeal filed by the Revenue shall stand returned to the Revenue for presentation before the competent court. Needless to say the appellant shall be free to file an application for condonation of delay in the presentation of the appeal before the competent court and claim such benefit in the same regarding the time taken in this court as may be legally permissible.

Summary

Issues:
Jurisdiction of High Court to hear appeals under section 260A of the Income-tax Act based on the situs of the Assessing Officer versus the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's location.

Analysis:
The primary issue in this case revolves around the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear appeals under section 260A of the Income-tax Act. The respondent argued that the situs of the Assessing Officer, rather than the location of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, determines the High Court's jurisdiction. Citing previous court decisions, the respondent contended that even if the Tribunal in Delhi had jurisdiction over territories in Uttar Pradesh, appeals must be filed before the High Court at Allahabad. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the transfer of assessment records to Delhi entitled them to maintain the appeal in the Delhi High Court. The court carefully considered these arguments and the legal precedents.

Upon examination of the facts, the court found that the assessment orders for the relevant years were passed in Bulandshahar and appeals were heard by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Meerut. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in Delhi had jurisdiction over territories in Uttar Pradesh. However, the court emphasized that the forum of appeal is determined by the situs of the Assessing Officer, not the Tribunal's location. Referring to previous decisions, the court held that appeals must be filed in the High Court within whose territorial limits the assessment proceedings were completed. In this case, since the assessments were completed in Bulandshahar and appeals were heard in Meerut, the appeal should be filed in the High Court at Allahabad.

Furthermore, the court addressed the impact of transferring assessment records to Delhi on the jurisdiction of the High Court. Citing a previous case, the court clarified that such transfers do not alter the High Court's territorial jurisdiction unless specific criteria under the Income-tax Act are met. In this instance, the transfer of records for pending assessments did not change the jurisdiction of the High Court. Therefore, the court upheld the preliminary objection raised by the respondent, ruling that the appeal should be returned to the Revenue for presentation before the competent court. The appellant was granted the opportunity to seek condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the appropriate court.