Appellate jurisdiction follows the Assessing Officer's location; Guwahati Bench lacked jurisdiction over the appeal and cross objections.

Appellate jurisdiction under the Income-tax Act was held to follow the location of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order, and not to shift merely because a case was transferred under section 127. On that scheme, where the assessment order had been passed by an Assessing Officer stationed at Kolkata, the Guwahati Bench was not the proper forum to hear the Revenue's appeal or the assessee's cross objections. The matter was therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction, with liberty to approach the appropriate Bench.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal and cross objections were maintainable before the Guwahati Bench when the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order was stationed at Kolkata, and whether the Tribunal lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

Analysis: The Tribunal applied the principle that appellate jurisdiction follows the location of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order. Relying on the Supreme Court's exposition on the jurisdictional scheme under the Income-tax Act, 1961, it held that the proper appellate forum is determined by the place where the assessing authority is situated, and that transfer of a case under section 127 does not alter the appellate forum for Tribunal proceedings. Since the assessment order had been passed by the Assessing Officer at Kolkata, the Guwahati Bench was not the competent forum to hear either the Revenue's appeal or the assessee's cross objections.

Conclusion: The appeal and the cross objections were dismissed for want of jurisdiction, with liberty to approach the appropriate Bench.

---