Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 2022 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 863 - SC - Income TaxAppropriate High Court for filing appeals u/s 260A - appropriate High Court for filing an appeal against an order of a bench of the ITAT exercising jurisdiction over more than one state - meaning attributed to the expression ‘cases’ in the Explanation to Section 127(4) of the Act - whether appellate jurisdiction of the High Court stands on its own foundation and cannot be subject to the exercise of executive power to transfer a ‘case’ from one Assessing Officer to another Assessing Officer? - HELD THAT:- The legal structure under the Income Tax Act commencing with Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Appeals, ITAT and finally the High Court under Section 260A must be seen as a lineal progression of judicial remedies. Culmination of all these proceedings in question of law jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 260A of the Act is of special significance as it depicts the overarching judicial superintendence of the High Court over Tribunals and other Authorities operating within its territorial jurisdiction. The power of transfer exercisable under Section 127 is relatable only to the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Authorities. It has no bearing on the ITAT, much less on a High Court. If we accept the submission, it will have the effect of the executive having the power to determine the jurisdiction of a High Court. This can never be the intention of the Parliament. The jurisdiction of a High Court stands on its own footing by virtue of Section 260A read with Section 269 of the Act. While interpreting a judicial remedy, a Constitutional Court should not adopt an approach where the identity of the appellate forum would be contingent upon or vacillates subject to the exercise of some other power. Such an interpretation will clearly be against the interest of justice. Under Section 127, the authorities have the power to transfer a case either upon the request of an assessee or for their own reasons. Though the decision under Section 127 is subject to judicial review or even an appellate scrutiny, this Court for larger reasons would avoid an interpretation that would render the appellate jurisdiction of a High Court dependent upon the executive power. As a matter of principle, transfer of a case from one judicial forum to another judicial forum, without the intervention of a Court of law is against the independence of judiciary. This is true, particularly, when such a transfer can occur in exercise of pure executive power. This is a yet another reason for rejecting the interpretation adopted in the case of Sahara. For the reasons stated above, we hold that the decision of the High Court of Delhi in Sahara [2007 (5) TMI 208 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and Aar Bee [2013 (7) TMI 94 - DELHI HIGH COURT] do not lay down the correct law and therefore, we overrule these judgments. In conclusion, we hold 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. Even if the case or cases of an assessee are transferred in exercise of power under Section 127 of the Act, the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer has passed the order, shall continue to exercise the jurisdiction of appeal. This principle is applicable even if the transfer is under Section 127 for the same assessment year(s). While returning the files to be represented in the appropriate court, certain observations were made stating that the appeals could be filed in the High Court which exercises territorial jurisdiction over the concerned ITAT. These observations are only obiter. In any event they did not preclude the party from filing the appeal before the appropriate High Court where the Assessing Officers exercised jurisdiction. However, we are reiterating for clarity and certainty that the jurisdiction of a High Court is not dependent on the location of the ITAT, as sometimes a Bench of the ITAT exercises jurisdiction over plurality of states. Order passed by the Assessing Officer, Delhi against which an appeal was decided by CIT (Appeals) – IV, New Delhi against which the ITAT, New Delhi disposed of an appeal against which an appeal was filed in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana which it disposed of by order against which Civil Appeal was filed before this Court. The said Civil Appeal is dismissed by upholding the order passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, with a direction that the appropriate High Court for disposal of the appeal would be the High Court of Delhi as the case was assessed by the Assessing Officer, Delhi.
|