9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 990X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Assessing Officer at Dharamshala, this court lacks territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. In view of the above, this court has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the lis over an order passed by the Assessing Officer, i.e. Income Tax Officer, Dharmashala (HP). Accordingly, the complete paper books of all the appeals are returned to the appellant-revenue for filing before the competent court of jurisdiction in accordance with law. - ITA Nos. 327, 333, 334 and 395 of 2015 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 3-3-2016 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MRS. RAJ RAHUL GARG, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This order shall dispose of ITA Nos.327, 333, 334 and 395 of 2015 as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 may be noticed. The respondent-assessee M/s Tibetan Children Village is a charitable institution established for the purpose of carrying out various activities such as providing education, vocational training etc. at different places. Return for the year ending 31.3.2008 declaring income at ` Nil was filed on 30.9.2008 after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. The return of income was accompanied with audited income and expenditure account and balance sheet etc. The case was processed under Section 143(1) vide order dated 15.1.2010 at the income returned by the assessee. However, the assessee revised its return again declaring income at nil on 13.4.2009 after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. The case was sel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel for the appellant-revenue. 5. After perusing the averments made in the appeal and hearing learned counsel for the appellant-revenue, we find that at the time of filing the income tax return for the assessment year 2008-09, the registered office of the assessee was at Dharamshala. The return was filed on 31.3.2008 at Dharamshala. The assessment order dated 27.12.2010, Annexure A.1 was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala, HP. Even the appeal was filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) at Shimla. Since the initial process of assessment was started at Dharmashala and the final assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer at Dharamshala, this court lacks territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. In The Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y it. Thus, such an assessee may avoid application of inconvenient law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court of Bombay. On the basis of the aforementioned reasoning, the Division Bench sustained the objection that the jurisdiction to entertain the application under sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 256 of the Act vested in the High Court of Bombay and not of Delhi. We are in respectful agreement with the aforementioned reasoning of the Delhi High Court. Accordingly, we hold that the preliminary objection raised by learned counsel for the assessee-respondent is sustainable. xxxx xxxx xxxx A conjoint reading of the aforementioned provisions makes it evident that the Director General or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner is empower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
