The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 vs Escorts Heart Institute And Research ...

[Cites 1, Cited by 1] Delhi High Court - Orders The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 vs Escorts Heart Institute And Research ... on 24 August, 2022 Author: Manmohan Bench: Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora $~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 281/2022 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.Standing Counsel for the Revenue with Ms.Mansie Jain, Advocate. versus ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Simran Mehta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA ORDER % 24.08.2022 Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 25th November, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA No. 2822/Del./2015 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. A perusal of the paper book reveals that in the present case, the assessment order had been passed by the Assessing Officer based in Chandigarh. Thereafter, the appeal was transferred by the CBDT to CIT(A), Delhi from Chandigarh. Recently, the Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - I, Chandigarh vs. ABC Papers Limited, Civil Appeal No.4252/2022 has held as under:-Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:25.08.2022 18:52:02 "33. Returning to the analyses in the decision in Sahara, we have noticed that the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi sought to distinguish the two decisions of the very same High Court in Suresh Desai and Digvijay Chemicals on the ground that those cases did not involve the transfer of cases of the very same assessment year. We will reformulate this as a proposition of law. If it is the accepted principle to determine the jurisdiction of a High Court under Section 260A of the Act on the basis of the location of the Assessing Officer who assessed the case, then, by the strength of the very same logic, upon transfer of a case to another Assessing Officer under Section 127, the jurisdiction under Section 260A must be with the High Court in whose jurisdiction the new Assessing Officer is located. A logical extension of this argument is that, once the case is transferred to an Assessing Officer situated outside the jurisdiction of the existing High Court, the entire files relating to the case should now be in the possession and custody of the new Assessing Officer. It could be argued that the Assessing Officer who exercised the jurisdiction before its transfer will not be in a position to assist the High Court, further, he cannot implement the decision of that High Court, after it decides the question of law as he is no more the Assessing Officer. We will now proceed to deal with these arguments." In view of the aforesaid judgment, this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present appeal. Accordingly, the same along with pending application is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with law in a court having territorial jurisdiction. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J AUGUST 24, 2022/KA Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:25.08.2022 18:52:02