Appeal dismissed for lack of territorial jurisdiction under section 260A - jurisdiction lies where original assessment order passed

Delhi HC dismissed appeal for lack of territorial jurisdiction. Court held that jurisdiction lies with the court where the Assessing Officer passed the original assessment order. Since the original assessment was passed by AO in Amritsar, Delhi HC lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under section 260A. Court relied on precedents establishing that the High Court within whose jurisdiction the AO issued the assessment order has jurisdiction to hear appeals. Given jurisdictional deficiency, court declined to examine merits or other procedural questions.

---

---

The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Chemester Food Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 (PCIT) had set aside the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the assessment year 2014-15, holding it to be erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. The ITAT allowed CFIPL's appeal, stating that an order framed in the name of a dissolved entity could not be revised under Section 263 of the Act, rendering the order invalid.The key legal questions considered in the appeal were:1. Whether there is a specific provision in the Income Tax Act to assess dissolved firmsRs. 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., which was deemed distinguishable from the present caseRs.CFIPL raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the original assessment order was passed by the AO in Amritsar. The court analyzed the jurisdictional issue and referred to precedents such as Seth Banarsi Dass Gupta v. Commissioner of Income Tax and Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh v. M/s ABC Papers Ltd. The court held that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal based on the location of the AO who passed the assessment order.The court further addressed the argument that CFIPL's appeal before the Delhi bench of the ITAT implied acceptance of jurisdiction, emphasizing that the lack of jurisdiction at the High Court level precluded examination of other issues. The court concluded that the appeal was disposed of, allowing the Revenue to appeal before the Punjab & Haryana High Court if desired.In summary, the court's decision centered on the lack of territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal based on the location of the AO who passed the assessment order, ultimately leading to the disposal of the appeal without delving into the merits of the case or the ITAT's jurisdiction.

---