| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 4010 (Del-HC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 260
Where Delhi High Court had taken a decision earlier on jurisdiction of assessee and subsequently Punjab and Haryana High Court took a contrary view, which was challenged by revenue in Supreme Court, On same issue Delhi High Court did not entertain appeal being bound by its own decision.
|
Appeal (High Court) - Jurisdiction - Conflicting orders of two High Courts -
In instant case, against same impugned order, revenue had initially filed appeal in High Court of Punjab and Haryana which held that notwithstanding an order under section 127, transferring jurisdiction of cases involving assessee to Chandigarh, jurisdiction would not be that of High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Held: It was held by Delhi High Court in CIT v. Aar Bee Industries (2013) 357 ITR 542 (Del) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 2096 (Del-HC) that where there was transfer of cases, then notwithstanding where original order of assessment order or order under challenge may have been passed, jurisdiction would lie with High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction situs of officer passing the order was located. This was of course contrary to view expressed by Punjab and Haryana High Court, which was challenged by revenue before Supreme Court and still pending. It was held that “since this Court is bound by its own view, obviously the present appeal cannot be entertained and is accordingly dismissed as suchâ€.
Applied:CIT v. Aar Bee Industries (2013) 357 ITR 542 (Del) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 2096 (Del-HC),
REFERRED : Pr. CIT v. ABC Papers Limited 2019 TaxPub(DT) 1936 (P&H-HC))
FAVOUR : In favour of assessee
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|