TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 333
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all the three appeals they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The common grounds in all the three appeals read as under:- 1. The Ld. CIT (A)-2, Noida has erred in law and facts by deciding the appeal of the asgessee without having jurisdiction over the case as the assessee in this case filed the appeal with the CIT(A)-1, Noida whereas the same should have been filer with the jurisdictional CIT(A), Ghaziabad. Moreover, although the date of the appellate order is 31.12.2018, the same has been received in this office on 18.06.2019, after the compulsory retirement u/s FR 56(j) of Sh. S.K. Srivastava, the then CIT(A)-I, Noida and has also been uploaded on the ITBA ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of 2019 and C.M.P. No. 3353 of 2019) where the shares of a company, in respect of which long term capital gain was claimed by the assessee as exempt, appeared in the data base of the Income Tax Department as penny stocks in tax evasion racket. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi have in their recent judgement in the case of Sh. Sanat Kumar Vs. ACIT, Circle-36(1), New Delhi(ITA No. 1881/Del/2018), Hon'ble ITAT 'E-Bench', delhi also stated that ".................. no doubt assessee has meticulously completed the paper work by routing his entire investment through banking channel but the results thereof are altogether beyond human probabilities." 4. An identical quarrel arose earlier for identical reasons as mentioned in the grounds of appeal. This Tribuna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the captioned cases the sole question arises for determination in this cases is : "as to whether impugned orders passed by Ld. CIT(A)-1 and 2 Noida are illegal, bad in law and non-est having been passed without jurisdiction in violation of CBDT notification and after his compulsory retirement {with effect from 11.06.2019 ?). 7. So far as appeals bearing ITA No. 1185/Del/2020, A.Y.2015-16, CO No. 49/Del/2020, A.Y. 2010-11. 6623/Del/2019.A.Y. 2015-16, ITA No. 6945/Del/20, A.Y. 2009-10. CO No. 152/Del/2019, A.Y. 2009-10 are concerned they are pertaining to Ghaziabad jurisdiction and only CIT(A)- Kanpur is having the jurisdiction to try and entertain the same as per CBDT no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etween 11th June to i3lh June, 2019. after his demitting the office. d. There are also indications of falsification of records to allude towards dispatch of these orders on 7th June, 2019, whereas they were dispatched on 14th June, 2019. e. Sh.Sanjay Kumar Srivastava passed 13 orders which were outside his jurisdiction. f. It was claimed that 104 orders were passed by Sh.Sanjay Kumar Srivastava during December, 2018, however many of them were uploaded to the central server using his RSA token only after his retirement. g. It is apprehended that either the orders were not passed by Sh.Sanjay Kumar Srivastava during December, 2018, or if the orders were indeed passed during . December, 2018, then the possib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jurisdictional defect strikes at the very authority of the Court to pass any decree and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of the parties. 10A. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case cited as Kanwar Singh Saini vs. High Court of Delhi held that order/ decree passed by court having no jurisdiction is a nullity by returning following findings: "There can be no dispute regarding the settled legal proposition that conferment of jurisdiction is a legislative function and it can neither be conferred with the consent of the parties nor by a superior court, and if the court passes order/decree having no jurisdiction over the matter, it would amount to a nullity as the matter goes to the roots of the cause. Such an issue....