VENKITESH SUBRAMANIAN, TRIVANDRUM V. CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

ITA 913/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0699 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UMESH PHADE LD.
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘SMC’ PUNE ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 3 BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 0913/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Venkitesh Subramanian TC, 38/293, Shreebhavan, Chenthittai Street, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala-695036. PAN: AWEPS4916P . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr Umesh Phade [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 29/07/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 29/07/2024 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; This appeal of the assessee instituted u/s 253(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] impugns DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1064053223(1) dt. 12/04/2024 passed by Ld. Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Appeals- 1, Jaipur [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ hereinafter] u/s 250 of the Act, which in turn arisen out of orders an intimation passed by the Ld. Central Processing Centre Bengaluru [‘Ld. CPC’ hereinafter] u/s 143(1B) of the Act anent to assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. Venkitesh Subramanian Vs CPC ITA No.0913/PUN/2024 AY:2018-19 ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 3 2. The case was called twice, none appeared at the bequest of appellant assessee, and we did found no request for adjournment on record. On the primary briefing from the Ld. DR we thought fit to dispose the matter ex-parte u/s 24 of Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963. 3. The records prima-facie reveals us that; an intimation u/s 143(IB) of the Act vide order dt. 19/03/2020 by the Ld. CPC which was assailed in an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 11/11/2023. The said appeal was dismissed in-limine by the Ld. CIT(A) as barred by limitation u/s 249(2)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the impugned order the assessee filed the present appeal before this tribunal. 4. At the outset of hearing, the Ld. DR Mr Prasad submitted that, the situs of the assessing officer who exercises jurisdiction over the appellant assessee falls outside the jurisdiction of this Bench; therefore present appeal of the assessee is not maintainable. To buttress this contention the Ld. DR beside pressing into service the standing order of ITAT also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘PCIT Vs ABC Paper Ltd.’ reported in [2022] 447 ITR 1 (SC) [Equivalent Citation 141 Taxmann.com 332 (SC)]. 5. Heard the Ld. DR and we note that, the registry vide letter dt. 07/05/2024 intimated a defect relating to non-filing of respondent’s information, in response thereto the appellant vide letter dt. 15/05/2024 confirmed the fact that his jurisdictional assessing officer is ‘Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Trivandrum, Area Code: KRL-W-92’ [‘Ld. AO’ hereinafter]. Thus undisputedly the situs of the Ld. AO falls outside the jurisdiction of this Tribunal/Bench. Venkitesh Subramanian Vs CPC ITA No.0913/PUN/2024 AY:2018-19 ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 3 6. Although certain benches of the Tribunal exercise its jurisdiction over more than one state, however the explanation 4 to Standing Order dt. 01/10/1197 issued under rule 4(1) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 prescribes that; the ordinary jurisdiction of the Tribunal should be based on the location of the Assessing Officer. Reinforcing the above principle, the Hon’ble Supreme court by its decision in ‘PCIT Vs ABC Papers Ltd.’ (supra), has put the issue of jurisdiction of appellate forum to rest by holding that, the ‘situs of the assessing officer’ is the only key factor for determining the jurisdiction of appellate forum irrespective of any administrative order passed u/s 127 of the Act in relation to transfer of cases. 7. In the instant case since the situs of the Ld. AO who framed the assessment is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Pune Tribunal/Bench, in view of the former judicial precedents without offering our comments on any issue, we deem it fit to dismiss this appeal of the assessee as not maintainable but with leave to institute it before appropriate bench of the Tribunal which in law exercises the jurisdiction over the Jurisdictional AO of the assessee, ergo ordered accordingly. 8. In result the appeal of the assessee stands DISMISSED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Monday, 29 th July, 2024. -S/d- -S/d- VINAY BHAMORE G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER प ु णे / PUNE ; दिन ां क / Dated : 29 th July, 2024. आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT Concerned. 4. The CIT(A) Concerned. 5. DR, ITAT, Bench ‘SMC’, Pune 6. ग र्डफ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश न ु स र / By Order वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्य य दिकरण, प ु णे / ITAT, Pune.