Gautam Gajabhai Kanjia Vs Assessment Unit (ITAT Delhi)
Appeals from ITAT orders lie before the High Court having jurisdiction over the AO who passed the assessment order- Wrong bench appeal dismissed: ITAT Delhi declines jurisdiction, grants liberty to approach Mumbai Bench
Delhi Tribunal dismissed the assessee’s appeal on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order was situated in Mumbai, whereas the appeal had been wrongly filed before the ITAT Delhi. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in PCIT, Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Ltd. (18.08.2022), it was held that appeals from ITAT orders lie before the High Court having jurisdiction over the AO who passed the assessment order, and correspondingly, the correct ITAT forum must be determined by the AO’s location. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable before the Delhi Bench, with liberty granted to the assessee to file the appeal before the ITAT, Mumbai Bench within 30 days from receipt of the order.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, New Delhi dated 25.11.2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20.
2. At the very outset, we find that the Assessing Officer of the assessee was based in Mumbai and the assessee has filed the instant appeal before the ITAT, Delhi Benches. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT, Chandigarh Vs. ABC Papers Ltd order dated 18.08.2022 has held that appeals against every decision of the ITAT shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order is situated and accordingly, the jurisdiction in the impugned case would lie with the ITAT Mumbai Bench.
