ITO WARD - 2(1), GHAZIABAD V. Yaogendra Kumar, Ghaziabad

ITA 1337/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1232 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 1337/Del/2020 ITO Vs. Yogendra Kumar, G’bad IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1337/DEL/2020 (A.Y 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Ward : 2 (1), Ghaziabad. (APPELLANT) Vs. Yogendra Kumar, S/o. Shri Thokar Singh alias Jaya Prakash, Vill. & Post – Morta, Ghaziabad [U.P. - 201 001] PAN No. AEUPY5089B (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR US, JM 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2010-11 against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Noida [hereinafter referred to as CIT (Appeals)] dated 28.12.2018. Appellant by N o n e; Respondent by Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT; Date of Hearing 11.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement 11.10.2022 2 ITA No. 1337/Del/2020 ITO Vs. Yogendra Kumar, G’bad 2. The brief facts of the case are that an assessment order came to be passed on 31.10.2017 by the Assessing Officer/ITO, Ward : 2 (1) Ghaziabad. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 22.11.2017, the assessee has preferred an appeal. The appeal preferred by the assessee has been dismissed by the CIT (Appeals)-1, Noida. Revenue has raised the following substantive grounds of appeal:- 4. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal the Revenue has preferred the present appeal on the ground that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) does not have territorial jurisdiction over the matter. 5. None appeared for the assessee. The notices sent by the Registry to the registered address of the assessee returned unserved. By considering the grounds of appeal of the Revenue and also the material on record, we deem it fit to decide the matter after hearing the ld. DR. 6. At the outset, the ld. DR fairly brought to our notice that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) does not have jurisdiction over the case at the time of passing the order and prayed for restoring the appeal to the file of the CIT (Appeals) who is having territorial jurisdiction over the matter. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, we inclined to restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT (Appeals), Ghaziabad for the purpose of de novo adjudication of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No. 1337/Del/2020 ITO Vs. Yogendra Kumar, G’bad Order pronounced in the Open Court on : 11.10.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (B. R. R. KUMAR) (YOGESH KUMAR US) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 11/10/2022 *MEHTA* Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Draft dictated 11.10.2022 Draft placed before author 11.10.2022 Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 11.10.2022 Order signed and pronounced on 11.10.2022 File came to P.S. 11.10.2022 File sent to the Bench Clerk 11.10.2022 Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. Date of dispatch of Order. Date of uploading on the website