2026 (1) TMI 1552

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5, CM APPL. 33982/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7612/2025, CM APPL. 33986/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7615/2025, CM APPL. 33993/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7616/2025, CM APPL. 33998/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7658/2025, CM APPL. 34105/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7662/2025, CM APPL. 34113/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7665/2025, CM APPL. 34122/2025 (stay), W.P.(C) 7667/2025, CM APPL. 34124/2025 (stay). For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Mr. Sanjeeva Ku. Gupta, Mr. Naresh Kapila, Advs. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC, Mr. Anant Mann, JSC, Mr. Pratksh Gupta, JSC, Ms. Lopamudra Mahapatra, Adv. JUDGMENT DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. This batch of writ petitions involves common facts and law, for which all of them are being disposed of by this common order. However, for the sake of convenience of disposal, the facts of W.P.(C) 6024/2025 (Sahara India Ltd. v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench & ors.) are being taken into consideration. 2. Without going into the genesis of the dispute involved in the appeal, suffice it to mention that feeling aggrieved of order dated 09.09.2005 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es us is that, Delhi Bench of the Tribunal not only held that it did not have the territorial jurisdiction to decide the appeals but has dismissed the appeals and cross-objections, instead of transferring them. A liberty to the parties was however given to institute or file fresh appeal and cross-objection while practically condoning the delay caused in doing the same. 10. Feeling aggrieved of the above order and approach of the Tribunal, the instant writ petitions have been preferred. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the order of the Tribunal at Delhi is not only illegal but also contrary to judicial and administrative discipline and has also led to a travesty of justice. He submitted that not only the instant appeals (more than 200 appeals) of Sahara Group came to be transferred by the President of the Tribunal from Lucknow Bench to Delhi Bench, by a number of orders passed way back in 2006, but the appeals filed in 1999-2000 and even upto 2005, which remained pending at Delhi Bench for about 20 years or more, have now been dismissed on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. It was argued that once the President of the Tribunal has exercised his ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause of the background facts. 17. A simple look at para No.4 of the impugned order clearly unravels that the fact that the appeals stood transferred from the Lucknow Bench of the Tribunal was very much known to the Bench hearing the appeals. We would like to reproduce relevant part of the order to underscore that the Tribunal was cognizant of the factum of transfer, which reads as follows : "4. Faced with this situation, both the learned parties raised their vehement submissions that Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Benches could very well decide the instant cases once they have transferred from Lucknow benches." (emphasis supplied) 18. According to us, the impugned order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal amounts to sitting over an administrative order of the President of the Tribunal and setting an administrative order at naught. Such order is in the teeth of the administrative powers of the President of the Tribunal. Once a matter stands transferred from one Bench to another for whatever reasons, except for the High Court or the court competent considering legality of said order, no statutory authority including the Tribunal can upturn such order of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause the issue does not directly emanate from any assessment order, the writ petitions are required to be heard by us and hence, the situs of AO will not be relevant and situs of the Tribunal (Delhi) is the determining factor. 23. Though, we are of the view that approach of the Tribunal, Delhi Bench in dismissing the appeals and directing the assessees and the department to file fresh appeals before Lucknow Bench of the Tribunal is erroneous but still we feel that even if the Delhi Bench was of the view that it lacked the territorial jurisdiction, it ought to have placed the matters before the President for passing appropriate orders for transferring these cases to Lucknow. This kind of practice showcases the Tribunal's overzealousness of disposing more cases. 24. We are informed that these (13 appeals) are not the only appeals, which Delhi Bench of the Tribunal has dismissed, there are many more. Ironically, by way of impugned order dated 20.11.2024, the Delhi Bench has been able to reduce its pendency by a number of cases but at the same time it has led to an automatic increase at Lucknow Bench and the Department & the assessee have been burdened with the onerous task of in....