IT : Where Tribunal Delhi decided appeal against order of Commissioner (Appeals) Lucknow, in view of Evidence Act, same was to be presumed to be regularly preformed
■■■
[2013] 38 taxmann.com 104 (Allahabad)
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Lucknow
v.
Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd.*
SIBGHAT ULLAH KHAN AND DR. SATISH CHANDRA, JJ.
IT APPEAL NOS. 36 TO 39, 50 & 55 OF 2010†
JULY 19, 2013
Section 255 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 4 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 - Appellate Tribunal - Procedure of [Transfer of jurisdiction] - Assessment years 1996-97 to 1999-2000 - Delhi Bench of Tribunal had decided appeal against order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Lucknow - Revenue challanged said order of Tribunal as without jurisdiction - Assessee pointed out that appeal was transferred to Delhi at own request of department - Though it was not mentioned in impugned order that appeals had been transferred, in memorandum of appeal, nowhere it was stated that there was no order passed by President of Tribunal to transfer appeal to Delhi Bench - Whether under section 114, illustration (e) of Evidence Act, there is always a presumption that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed and, therefore order passed by Delhi Tribunal was within jurisdiction - Held, yes [Para 8] [In favour of assessee]
D.D. Chopra and Prashant Kumar for the Appellant.
ORDER
1. Heard Sri Prashant Verma, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri P.J. Pardliwala, learned counsel for the respondent in each appeal.
2. These appeals have been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The first four appeals are against the order dated 20.03.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'H', New Delhi in I.T.A. No.97 to 100/10/Del./2006 for the assessment year 1996-97 to 1999-00 (Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow v. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow). The last two appeals are directed against order dated 26.06.2009 by the same bunch of the ITAT (Delhi) in I.T.A. Nos.700 & 701/L/2005 involving the same assessee.
3. Each of these appeals was admitted on 08.04.2010 on the following substantial question of law:-
"Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi had decided appeal without jurisdiction since the original appellate order was passed by CIT (A), Lcuknow?"
4. This is the only point which has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant. No other point has been sought to be raised. Learned counsel for respondent has pointed out that the appeal was transferred to Delhi at the own request of the department. Learned counsel for the appellant wanted some time to ascertain this fact. However, we are not placing sole reliance upon this statement.
5. Under Section 255(1) of Income Tax Act, it is provided that the powers and functions of the Appellate Tribunal may be exercised and discharged by Benches constituted by the President of the Appellate Tribunal from among members thereof. Under sub-Section (5), it is provided that Appellate Tribunal shall have power to regulate its own procedure and the procedure of Benches thereof in all matters arising out of the exercise of its power or of the discharge of its functions including the places at which the Benches shall hold their sittings.
6. Through notification dated 17.04.1963, Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 have been framed Under Rule 4 (2), it is provided as follows:
"Where there are two or more benches of the Tribunal working at any headquarters, the President or in his absence, the Senior Vice President …..may transfer an appeal or an application from any one of such Benches to any others."
7. Under Standing Order framed under Rule 4(1) of the aforesaid Rules it is provided that subject to any special order all appeals and applications from the Districts, States and Union Territories specified in Column-3 shall w.e.f. 01.10.1997 be heard and determined by the benches specified in Column-2 of the table given thereunder. The said Standing Order refers to special order which means order of transfer of appeal from one bench to another. Even though in the impugned order it is not mentioned that appeals had been transferred, however, under section 114 illustration (e) Evidence Act there is always a presumption that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. Moreover, in the memorandum of appeal, no where it is stated that there was no order passed by the President of the Tribunal to transfer the appeal(s) to Delhi Bench.
8. Accordingly, the substantial question of law framed at the time of admission is decided against the appellants and in favour of the respondent. Appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.
POOJARegards
Prarthana Jalan
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment