JCIT, CHENNAI V. Compass /Cgroup (India) Support Services Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1539/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8258 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHINAYA RAMANUJAM

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !.. # $%, ' () BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1539/MDS/2016 + ,+ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S COMPASS GROUP (INDIA) SUPPORT SERVICES PVT. LTD., HM CENTRE, 1 ST FL. NO.29, NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI - 600 034. PAN : AADCC 9070 A (.// APPELLANT) (01.// RESPONDENT) ./ 2 3 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT 01./ 2 3 / RESPONDENT BY : MS. ABHINAYA RAMANUJAM, CA # 2 4' / DATE OF HEARING : 19.10.2016 56, 2 4' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.10.2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -5, PUNE, DATED 20.01.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2 I.T.A. NO.1539/MDS/16 2. THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, NAMELY, JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-7, PUNE. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH HOW THE APPEAL I S MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHEN THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER IS AT PUNE? THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CLARIFIE D THAT THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER AMALGAMATION, WAS TRANSFERRED TO CHENNAI. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE DEPARTMENT IS ASSESSING THE ASSESSEE AT CHENNAI , THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS THE JURISDICTION. WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THIS EXPLANATION OF THE REVENUE. THE JURISDICTION OF TH E BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IS DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF THE LOCATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT WHERE THE ASSESSME NT WAS MAINTAINED BY THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT. THIS TRIB UNAL WILL HAVE JURISDICTION IN CASE THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THIS BENCH. ADMITTEDLY, THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IS HAVING TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OVER THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY. SINCE THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO HAS PASSED THE ORDER, IS ADM ITTEDLY LOCATED AT PUNE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE PUNE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL ALONE HAS JURISDICTION. THE REFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL IS NOT 3 I.T.A. NO.1539/MDS/16 MAINTAINABLE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 3. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IT IS OPEN TO THE REVENUE TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THE PUNE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE THEY ARE SO ADVISED AND REQUEST THE HON'BLE PRESIDENT OF THI S TRIBUNAL TO TRANSFER THE APPEAL TO CHENNAI BENCH. 4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THIS APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH OCTOBER, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! . . # $% ) ( . . . ) (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 8 /DATED, THE 19 TH OCTOBER, 2016. KRI. 2 04$9 :9,4 /COPY TO: 1. ./ /APPELLANT 2. 01./ /RESPONDENT 3. # ;4 () /CIT(A), PUNE-5, PUNE 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, PUNE-4, PUNE 5. 9< 04 /DR 6. !+ = /GF.