M/s. Krishna Roadways, New Delhi V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2271/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8272 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Keywords: Competent authority

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.2271/MDS/2016 ' (' /ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 KRISHNA ROADWAYS, C/O. ATUL PURI & CO., 121, FIRST FLOOR, SHANKAR ROAD MARKET, NEW RAJINDER NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 060. PAN : AABFK 2437 L V. ITO, BUSINESS WARD VIII (3), CHENNAI. ( )* /APPELLANT) ( +,)* /RESPONDENT) )* - . /APPELLANT BY : SHRI ATUL PURI, C.A. +,)*-. /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT ! -/$ /DATE OF HEARING : 20.10.2016 01( -/$ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.10.2016 /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF CIT(A) -13, CHENNAI DATED 08.03.2016 AND PERTAINS T O ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 I.T.A. NO. 2271/MDS/2016 2. SHRI ATUL PURI, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR T HE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TR ANSFERRED TO NEW DELHI. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THE COMMISSIONER TO T RANSFER THE PRESENT APPEAL TO NEW DELHI. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL WAS TR ANSFERRED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -17, NEW DELHI . THEREFORE, THE PRESENT CIT(A) HAS NO JURISDICTION TO PASS ANY ORDE R. HENCE, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS NULL AND VOID. 3. WE HEARD SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, THE LEARNED REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE DEPARTMENT ALSO. A PERUSAL OF THE MATERIALS AVAILAB LE ON RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT TRANSFERRED BY ANY AUTHORIT Y WHO IS COMPETENT TO TRANSFER THE APPEAL FROM ONE COMMISSIONER TO ANOTHE R. THE ASSESSEE SIMPLY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE LETTER SAID TO BE WR ITTEN BY PRIVATE SECRETARIES TO THE COMMISSIONER AND CLAIMS THAT THE APPEAL WAS TRANSFERRED. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPI NION THAT THE APPEAL CAN BE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE CIT TO ANOTHER BY AN OR DER OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY. SINCE THE TRANSFER IS FROM CHENNAI TO DE LHI, NORMALLY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY WOULD BE THE CENTRAL BOARD OF D IRECT TAX OR ANY OF THE OFFICERS WHO WAS ENTRUSTED THE MATTER BY THE CE NTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT 3 I.T.A. NO. 2271/MDS/2016 TAXES. IT IS NOT BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ANY ORDER PA SSED BY EITHER CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAX OR ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES WHO A RE COMPETENT TO TRANSFER THE APPEAL FROM ONE COMMISSIONER TO ANOTHE R. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT CORRECT TO SAY THAT THE APPEAL WAS TRANSFERRED TO DELHI COMMISSIONER AND THE PRESENT COMMISSIONER AT CHENNAI HAS NO JURI SDICTION TO PASS ORDER. SINCE THE APPEAL WAS NOT TRANSFERRED TO DELH I COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPIN ION THAT THE PRESENT CIT(A) HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE. 4. NOW COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL, ADMITTEDL Y, THE CIT(A) HAS NOT DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. IT IS ALS O A FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT(A). PROBAB LY, THE ASSESSEE MAY BE UNDER THE BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT THE APPEA L WAS TRANSFERRED TO DELHI. WHATEVER MAY BE THE REASON, GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) MAY NOT PREJUD ICE THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE IN ANY WAY. MOREOVER, GIVING ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) WOULD DEFINITE LY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). N OW, IT IS OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO EITHER ARGUE THE CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A) -13, CHENNAI OR TO REQUEST THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER THE FIL E TO DELHI. 4 I.T.A. NO. 2271/MDS/2016 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 20 TH OCTOBER, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . ! '# ) ( . . . ) (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED, THE 20 TH OCTOBER, 2016. SP. - +/'3 43(/ /COPY TO: 1. )* /APPELLANT 2. +,)* /RESPONDENT 3. ! 5/ ( )/CIT(A) 4. ! 5/ /CIT, 5. 36 +/ /DR 6. ' 7 /GF.