Territorial jurisdiction under Section 260A depends on the Tribunal Bench's State, not the assessee's separate nexus.

An appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act lies to the High Court for the State to which the Tribunal Bench belongs, because the appellate forum is fixed by the territorial connection of the Tribunal order and the definition of "High Court" in relation to that State. Where the impugned order was passed by the Bangalore Bench, the appropriate forum was the Karnataka High Court, not the Calcutta High Court, and the latter had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Time spent before the wrong forum was directed to be considered under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, was maintainable before the Calcutta High Court or only before the Karnataka High Court.

Analysis: Section 260A provides for an appeal to the High Court from an order of the Appellate Tribunal, and Section 269 defines "High Court" in relation to a State as the High Court for that State. Read with Section 260A(7) and the principles underlying Section 100(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellate forum is determined by the territorial connection with the State in which the Tribunal passed the order. Since the impugned Tribunal order was passed by the Bangalore Bench, the relevant High Court was the High Court of Karnataka. The Court preferred this view and held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Time spent before the wrong forum was directed to be considered under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable before the Calcutta High Court and could be presented before the appropriate jurisdictional High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: For an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the High Court having jurisdiction is the High Court for the State to which the Tribunal Bench belongs, and not another High Court merely because the assessee or assessment nexus may lie elsewhere.

---