INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI V. GURMAIL SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 681/CHANDI/2023

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the Revenue against the order of the CIT (Appeals) for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The appeals were directed against penalty orders issued by the DCIT/ACIT, Circle-2 Bathinda. The primary legal issue was the appropriate jurisdiction for filing these appeals, as the territorial jurisdiction over Bathinda lies with the ITAT Amritsar Bench. Additionally, the counsel for the assessee argued that the quantum additions, which were the basis for the penalties, had been deleted, thus questioning the survival of the penalties. The tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals due to jurisdictional issues, providing an opportunity for the Revenue to refile in the correct forum.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705984 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh Vs M/s ABC Papers Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 4252 of 2022 arising out of SLP(C) No. 23352 of 2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANAV BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANPREET SINGH KANDA; AMIT PRASAD; ADVOCATES
• Keywords: Competent authority
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 681 & 682/CHD/2023 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 The ITO, Mohali. Vs Shri Gurmail Singh, Through L/H Shri Arshpreet Singh, House No. C-10, Dolphin Tower, Sector 78, Mohali. èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AJYPS4799P अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Manpreet Singh Kanda & Shri Amit Prasad, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.07.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The present two appeals are directed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT (Appeals) dated 22.09.2023 passed for assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12. 2. A perusal of the record would emerge out that these appeals emanate from penalty orders dated 17.03.2020 passed by Shri Arvind Kumar Bansal, DCIT/ACIT, Circle-2 Bathinda. ITA No.681 & 682/CHD/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 2 3. The territorial jurisdiction over Bathinda lies with ITAT Amritsar Bench, therefore, these appeals ought to have been filed by the Department before the ITAT Amritsar. They are not maintainable in the present Forum as per the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.08.2022 in the case of ‘Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh Vs M/s ABC Papers Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 4252 of 2022 arising out of SLP(C) No. 23352 of 2019. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that quantum additions stand deleted, therefore, otherwise also, these penalties will not survive. 4. The ld. DR, on the other hand, was unable to controvert this aspect. 5. We have duly considered the rival contentions. The question of entertaining the appeal on merit would only arise when this Bench has jurisdiction to adjudicate them on merit. Once the Bench lacks jurisdiction, then it cannot adjudicate the issues on merit by taking cognizance of the fact that quantum additions have been deleted and therefore, the very foundation to visit the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) does not survive. We are of the view that these appeals are to be dismissed threshold with an opportunity to the Revenue to file fresh ITA No.681 & 682/CHD/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 3 appeals before an appropriate Bench of the Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction over the AO who has passed the impugned orders. Since, according to the ld. counsel for the assessee, quantum additions stand deleted, therefore, we will appreciate that if the Competent Authority approving the filing of appeals would look into this aspect and then decide whether appeals are to be filed before Appropriate Bench of the ITAT or not, but needless to say, our observations will not impair or injure the case of the Revenue for filing appeals before an appropriate Forum, nor our observations will cause any prejudice to the defence/explanation of the assessee on merit. 6. In the result, both appeals are dismissed for statistical purpose being not maintainable. Order pronounced on 01.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” आदेश कì ÿितिलिप अúेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथê/ The Appellant 2. ÿÂयथê/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुĉ/ CIT 4. िवभागीय ÿितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चÁडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाडª फाईल/ Guard File सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar "