https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17330 Territorial jurisdiction to entertain an application under s. 256(2) of the Income-tax Act was determined by applying the doctrine of precedents and binding efficacy of law within territorial limits. The HC held that the competent HC is the one exercising jurisdiction over the situs of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order, preventing forum-shopping to secure a favourable contrary view. A later administrative transfer of certain assessment records under s. 127(1) for other years did not amount to a jurisdictional transfer under s. 120 and had no bearing on jurisdiction for the concluded year in question. The petition was dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction, with liberty to approach the competent HC. en-us Fri, 05 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 19:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17330 Territorial jurisdiction to entertain an application under s. 256(2) of the Income-tax Act was determined by applying the doctrine of precedents and binding efficacy of law within territorial limits. The HC held that the competent HC is the one exercising jurisdiction over the situs of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order, preventing forum-shopping to secure a favourable contrary view. A later administrative transfer of certain assessment records under s. 127(1) for other years did not amount to a jurisdictional transfer under s. 120 and had no bearing on jurisdiction for the concluded year in question. The petition was dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction, with liberty to approach the competent HC. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17330