TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UMAR GARG JJ. Sanjeev Bansal for the appellant. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Satish Kumar Mittal J.- The Department has filed this appeal against the order dated February 14, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench "A" Chennai, in I. T. A. No. 66/Mds/2002, titled as the Deputy CIT v. Investment Trust of India Ltd. pertaining to the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al against the order of the Chennai Bench, merely on the ground that after passing of the impugned order, the assessee has shifted its registered office from the jurisdiction of the Madras High Court to the jurisdiction of this court. Section 269 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which falls under Chapter XX, dealing with appeals and revisions, provides that in this Chapter, "High Court" means (i) in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court of Bombay and not in the High Court of Delhi. Again a similar question came for consideration before this court in I. T. A. No. 44 of 2005, titled as CIT v. Motorola India Ltd., which was decided by a Division Bench of this court on October 3, 2007, ([2010] 326 ITR 156 (P H)), wherein it was held as under (page 161) : "We have thoughtfully considered the submissions made by the learned c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the business or residence of the assessee but by the location of the office of the Assessing Officer. This statutory guidance is available from the standing order dated September 16, 1997, passed under sub-rule (1) of rule 4 of the Rules." 4. In view of the aforesaid legal position, we are of the opinion that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Therefore, this appeal is re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
