IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ITA NO.691/2019 BETWEEN:
1 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 095.
2 . THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE NOIDA, PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CIRCLE-2, LTU 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET RAOD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095.
(BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND:
M/S PHEONIX LAMPS LTD., 59A, NSEZ, PHASE-II, NOIDA.
...APPELLANTS …RESPONDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.2845/DEL/2007 DATED:31.10.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 ANNEXURE – C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 2, LTU, BENGALURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :
JUDGMENT
Registry has raised following objection:
“8. How the above ITA is maintainable at High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, when the order passed by ITAT New Delhi and also both parties in ITAT belongs to Noida to be clarified.”
2. Revenue has called in question order dated 31.10.2017 passed in ITA No.2845/Del/2007 by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, ‘F’ New Delhi (for short ‘ITAT’). As this Court does not possess appellate jurisdiction as well as supervisory jurisdiction, examining the correctness and legality of the order passed by ITAT, Delhi Bench does not arise.
3. Office objection is sustained. Appeal in question is held as not maintainable and accordingly it is dismissed. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the order passed by ITAT, Delhi Bench on same being substituted by a photocopy and appellant would be at liberty to file appeal before the jurisdictional High Court within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from today. It is made clear that time spent by the appellant before this Court from the date of filing of this appeal i.e., 09.10.2019 till date of filing of the appeal before the jurisdictional High Court (i.e., within eight (8) weeks), shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation.
SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE DR