2019 (5) TMI 1558 - HC - Income Tax

High Court Upholds Jurisdiction Based on Officer's Location, Dismisses Revenue Appeal

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Chandigarh Versus M/s. Kuantum Papers Ltd.

The High Court dismissed the appeal by the Revenue against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The Court ... Transferring the jurisdiction of the cases u/s 127 - Jurisdiction of HC - correctness of an order passed under Section 153-A of the Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT) at Ghaziabad - HELD THAT:- The Court is informed by the learned counsel for the Revenue that as far as the order under Section 153-A of the Act passed by the DCIT, Ghaziabad is concerned, against the order of the ITAT, the Revenue has already approached the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. At the same time, the Revenue has also filed a Special Leave Petition against the judgment M/S ABC PAPERS LIMITED [2019 (3) TMI 501 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The decision in the said SLP is awaited. As far as the position of law is concerned, this Court in CIT v. Aar Bee Industries [2013 (7) TMI 94 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has held that where there is transfer of cases, then notwithstanding where the original order of assessment order or order under challenge may have been passed, the jurisdiction would lie with the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the situs of the Officer passing the order is located. This is of course contrary to the view expressed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in M/S ABC PAPERS LIMITED [2019 (3) TMI 501 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] before it, which has been challenged by the Revenue before the Supreme Court. Issues: Jurisdictional conflict between High Courts regarding transfer of cases under Income Tax Act, 1961.In this judgment, the High Court addressed the appeal by the Revenue against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - I, Chandigarh, had initially filed an appeal in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. However, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a separate judgment, held that despite a transfer of jurisdiction under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana would not have jurisdiction over the cases. Consequently, the appeal in the Punjab and Haryana High Court was dismissed. The issue in question was the correctness of an order under Section 153-A of the Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT) at Ghaziabad, and an assessment order dated 30th December, 2010 passed by the DCIT, Circle-1, New Delhi under Section 143 (3) of the Act.The counsel for the Revenue informed the Court that the order under Section 153-A passed by the DCIT, Ghaziabad, is being challenged in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, and a Special Leave Petition has been filed against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Court noted that its own precedent, as established in CIT v. Aar Bee Industries, dictates that jurisdiction lies with the High Court where the Officer passing the order is located, regardless of where the original order was passed. This conflicts with the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which has been contested by the Revenue before the Supreme Court. Due to being bound by its own precedent, the Court dismissed the present appeal and related applications.In conclusion, the judgment delves into the jurisdictional conflict arising from the transfer of cases under the Income Tax Act, highlighting the differing views of High Courts on the matter. The Court's decision was based on established precedent regarding the territorial jurisdiction of High Courts in cases involving the location of the Officer passing the order, emphasizing the importance of consistency in legal interpretation.