2. os itxa 1142 16.doc R.M. AMBERKAR (Private Secretary) IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1142 OF 2016 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Pune .. Appellant Versus M/s. Sungard Solutions (I) Pvt Ltd .. Respondent ................... Mr. Tejveer Singh for Appellant Mr. R. Murlidhar i/by P.C. Tripathi for Respondent ................... CORAM : AKIL KURESHI & M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 26, 2019. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per M.S. Sanklecha, J.) 1. This appeal under Section 260 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short), challenges order dated 30.7.2015 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Banglore Bench, Banglore ( Tribunal for short). This appeal relates to Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. At very outset before we could consider questions of law raised by Revenue in this appeal, learned counsel appearing for respondent raised preliminary objection. objection being about 1 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc maintainability of this appeal before this Court. 3. In support of its objections, Mr. Murlidhar on behalf of respondent submits that impugned order dated 30.7.2015 has been passed by Banglore Bench of Tribunal. Thus, appeal from order of Banglore Bench of Tribunal would lie before Karnataka High Court and not before this Court. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon Chapter XX of Act and, in particular Section 260A and 269 of Act. 4. In response, Mr. Tejveer Singh, learned counsel appearing in support of appeal states that this Court would alone have jurisdiction, in view of facts giving rise to present appeal. Our attention was drawn to following facts:- (a). order of Tribunal at Banglore was passed on 30.7.2015; (b). On 8.9.2015, order was passed under Section 127 of Act transferring respondent assessee's case from Assessing Officer at 2 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Banglore to Assessing Officer at Pune; (c). This appeal was filed in this Court on 4.1.2006. On aforesaid facts, it is submitted that this Court will alone have jurisdiction to deal with respondent assesssee's case. This at Assessment proceedings of respondent are now in Mumbai consequent to order dated 8th September, 2015 passed under Section 127 of Act. 5. On aforesaid facts, Mr. Tejveer Singh, for Revenue in support contented that this Court will have jurisdiction, made following submissions:- (a). It is situs of Assessing Officer which will alone determine High Court which would have jurisdiction over orders of Tribunal under Section 260-A of Act. In this case, seat of Assessing Officer at time of filing this appeal is Pune. Therefore, this Court would alone be appropriate High Court to deal with this appeal. 3 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc (b). In terms of Section 127 of Act, assessment proceedings were transferred from Assessing Officer at Banglore to Assessing Officer in Pune. entire assessment proceedings (whether completed or pending) both before and after transfer, also stands transfered to Assessing Officer at Pune by virtue of explanation thereto. Therefore, in terms thereof, all proceeding under Act stand transferred to transferee Assessing Officer at Pune, even in respect of cases where assessments are already completed; and (c). In any case, issue now stands settled in favour of Revenue by decisions of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd.1 and CIT Vs. AAR Bee Industries2. In both above cases, on identical fact situation, Court held that consequent to transfer of assessment proceedings under Section 127 of Act, orders of Tribunal under Section 260A 1 294 ITR 363 (Delhi) 2 357 ITR 542 (Delhi) 4 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc of Act are to be challenged at place where transferee Assessing Officer exercises jurisdiction. In case of Sahara India Financial Corp Ltd (supra) transfer under Section 127 of Act, Assessment Proceedings were transferred from Lucknow to Delhi. Court held that in such case, appeal from Lucknow bench of Tribunal would be before Delhi High Court. Similarly, in case of transfer of assessment proceeding under Section 127 of Act, from Jammu to Delhi in case of AAR Bee Industries (supra) led Court to hold Delhi High court would have jurisdiction to entertain appeals from order of Amritsar bench of Tribunal under Section 260A of Act. Therefore, seat of Assessing Officer on date of filing appeal would decide jurisdiction and on that test, appeal from order dated 30.07.2015 of Banglore bench of Tribunal would lie before this Court. 5 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc 6 In response, Mr. Murlidhar, learned counsel appearing for respondent contests submission of appellant while submitting that this Court would not have jurisdiction to entertain appeal for following reasons:- (a). appeal to High Courts are governed by Chapter XX of Act. In particular, Section 260A of Act which provides for appeal to High Court from every order passed in appeal by Tribunal. Section 269 of Act, for purpose of Chapter XX of Act defines High Court of State. Therefore, above Section 269 of Act would decide High Court to which appeal would lie under Section 260A of Act; (b) Section 127 of Act only deals with jurisdiction of authorities under Act. It cannot control/ decide and/or determine which High Court will be appellate forum to challenge orders of Tribunal. This, particularly, when there are specific provisions in Act dealing with appeals to High Court; and (c). In any event, this very issue was subject matter of consideration before Punjab & Haryana High 6 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Court in case of CIT Vs. Motorola India Ltd3, and Calcutta High Court in case of CIT V.s J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd4 In both above cases, Court held that seat of Tribunal which passed order would determine High Court to which appeal under section 260A of Act would be maintainable/ lie. In this case, as order being challenged is of Bangalore bench of Tribunal, Karnataka High Court is proper forum. 7. Before dealing with submissions of parties, it will be convenient to reproduce relevant provisions of Act which have bearing on issue before us viz. jurisdiction of this Court to entertain this appeal from order of Tribunal passed at Banglore. This in context of Assessment Proceedings having been transferred under Section 127 of Act from Bangalore to Pune. 8 Chapter XIII of Act deals with Income Tax Authorities. Sections 116, 120, 124 and 127 of Act are part of Chapter XIII of Act. Section 116 of Act lists out 3 (2010) 326 ITR 156 4 (2005) 272 ITR 321 7 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Income Tax Authorities under Act and is as under:- " Income-tax Authorities. 116. There shall be following classes of income-tax authorities for purposes of this Act, namely : (a) Central Board of Direct Taxes constituted under Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 (54 of 1963), (aa) Principal Directors General of Income-tax or Principal Chief Commissioners of Income-tax, (b) Directors-General of Income-tax or Chief Commissioners of Income-tax, (ba)Principal Directors of Income-tax or Principal Commissioners of Income-tax, (c) Directors of Income-tax or Commissioners of Income-tax or Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), (cc)Additional Directors of Income-tax or Additional Commissioners of Income-tax or Additional Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), (cca)Joint Directors of Income-tax or Joint Commissioners of Income-tax, (d) Deputy Directors of Income-tax or Deputy Commissioners of Income-tax or Deputy Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), (e) Assistant Directors of Income-tax or Assistant Commissioners of Income-tax, (f) Income-tax Officers, (g) Tax Recovery Officers, (h) Inspectors of Income-tax." Section 120 of Act deals with jurisdiction of Income Tax Authorities, and is as under:- "Jurisdiction of income-tax authorities. (1) Income-tax authorities shall exercise all or any of powers and perform all or any of functions conferred on, or, as case may be, assigned to such authorities by or under this Act in accordance with such directions as Board may issue for exercise of powers and performance of functions by all or any of those authorities. 8 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Explanation. For removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any income-tax authority, being authority higher in rank, may, if so directed by Board, exercise powers and perform functions of income-tax authority lower in rank and any such direction issued by Board shall be deemed to be direction issued under sub-section (1). (2) directions of Board under sub-section (1) may authorise any other income-tax authority to issue orders in writing for exercise of powers and performance of functions by all or any of other income-tax authorities who are subordinate to it. (3) In issuing directions or orders referred to in sub-sections (1) and (2), Board or other income-tax authority authorised by it may have regard to any one or more of following criteria, namely : (a) territorial area; (b) persons or classes of persons; (c) incomes or classes of income; and (d) cases or classes of cases. (4) Without prejudice to provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2), Board may, by general or special order, and subject to such conditions, restrictions or limitations as may be specified therein, (a) authorise any [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Director or] Director to perform such functions of any other income-tax authority as may be assigned to him by Board; (b) empower [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner to issue orders in writing that powers and functions conferred on, or as case may be, assigned to, Assessing Officer by or under this Act in respect of any specified area or persons or classes of persons or incomes or classes of income or cases or classes of cases, shall be exercised or performed by [an Additional Commissioner or] [an Additional Director or] [Joint] Commissioner [or [Joint] Director], and, where any order is made under this clause, references in any other provision of this Act, or in any rule made thereunder to Assessing Officer shall be deemed to be references to such [Additional Commissioner or] [Additional Director or] [Joint] Commissioner [or [Joint] Director] by whom powers and functions are to be exercised or performed under such order, 9 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc and any provision of this Act requiring approval or sanction of [Joint] Commissioner shall not apply. (5) directions and orders referred to in sub-sections (1) and (2) may, wherever considered necessary or appropriate for proper management of work, require two or more Assessing Officers (whether or not of same class) to exercise and perform, concurrently, powers and functions in respect of any area or persons or classes of persons or incomes or classes of income or cases or classes of cases; and, where such powers and functions are exercised and performed concurrently by Assessing Officers of different classes, any authority lower in rank amongst them shall exercise powers and perform functions as any higher authority amongst them may direct, and, further, references in any other provision of this Act or in any rule made thereunder to Assessing Officer shall be deemed to be references to such higher authority and any provision of this Act requiring approval or sanction of any such authority shall not apply. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in any direction or order issued under this section, or in Section 124, Board may, by notification in Official Gazette, direct that for purpose of furnishing of return of income or doing of any other act or thing under this Act or any rule made thereunder by any person or class of persons, income-tax authority exercising and performing powers and functions in relation to said person or class of persons shall be such authority as may be specified in notification." Section 124 of Act deals with jurisdiction of Assessing Officers and is as under:- "Jurisdiction of Assessing Officers. 124. (1) Where by virtue of any direction or order issued under sub-Section (1) or sub-Section (2) of Section 120, Assessing Officer has been vested with jurisdiction over any area, within limits of such area, he shall have jurisdiction (a) in respect of any person carrying on business or profession, if place at which he carries on his business or profession is situate within area, or where his business or profession is carried on in more places than one, if principal place of his business or profession is situate within area, and 10 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc (b) in respect of any other person residing within area. (2) Where question arises under this Section as to whether Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to assess any person, question shall be determined by [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner; or where question is one relating to areas within jurisdiction of different [Principal Directors General or] Directors General or [Principal Chief Commissioners or] Chief Commissioners or [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners, by [Principal Directors General or] Directors General or [Principal Chief Commissioners or] Chief Commissioners or [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners concerned or, if they are not in agreement, by Board or by such [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as Board may, by notification in Official Gazette, specify. (3) No person shall be entitled to call in question jurisdiction of Assessing Officer (a) where he has made return [under sub-Section (1) of Section 115WD or] under sub-Section (1) of Section 139, after expiry of one month from date on which he was served with notice under sub-Section (1) of Section 142 or [sub-Section (2) of Section 115WE or] sub-Section (2) of Section 143 or after completion of assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after expiry of time allowed by notice under [sub-Section (2) of Section 115WD or sub-Section (1) of Section 142 or under sub-Section (1) of Section 115WH or under Section 148 for making of return or by notice under first proviso to Section 115WF or under first proviso to Section 144] to show cause why assessment should not be completed to best of judgment of Assessing Officer, whichever is earlier; (c) where action has been taken under Section 132 or Section 132A, after expiry of one month from date on which he was served with notice under sub-Section (1) of Section 153A or sub-Section (2) of Section 153C or 11 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc after completion of assessment, whichever is earlier.] (4) Subject to provisions of sub-Section (3), where assessee calls in question jurisdiction of Assessing Officer, then Assessing Officer shall, if not satisfied with correctness of claim, refer matter for determination under sub-Section (2) before assessment is made. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Section or in any direction or order issued under Section 120, every Assessing Officer shall have all powers conferred by or under this Act on Assessing Officer in respect of income accruing or arising or received within area, if any, over which he has been vested with jurisdiction by virtue of directions or orders issued under sub-Section (1) or sub-Section (2) of Section 120.]" Section 127 of Act deals with power to transfer cases and is as under:- "Power to transfer cases. (1) [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may, after giving assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard in matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, transfer any case from one or more Assessing Officers subordinate to him (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) also subordinate to him. (2) Where Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom case is to be transferred and Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers to whom case is to be transferred are not subordinate to same [Principal Director General or Director General or] 12 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner, (a) where [Principal Directors General or] Directors General or [Principal Chief Commissioners or] Chief Commissioners or [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners to whom such Assessing Officers are subordinate are in agreement, then [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner from whose jurisdiction case is to be transferred may, after giving assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard in matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, pass order; (b) where [Principal Directors General or] Directors General or [Principal Chief Commissioners] or Chief Commissioners or [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners aforesaid are not in agreement, order transferring case may, similarly, be passed by Board or any such [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as Board may, by notification in Official Gazette, authorise in this behalf. (3) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be deemed to require any such opportunity to be given where transfer is from any Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) and offices of all such officers are situated in same city, locality or place. (4) transfer of case under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) may be made at any stage of proceedings, and shall not render necessary re-issue of any notice already issued by Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom case is transferred. 13 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Explanation. In section 120 and this section, word "case", in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued thereunder, means all proceedings under this Act in respect of any year which may be pending on date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or before such date, and includes also all proceedings under this Act which may be commenced after date of such order or direction in respect of any year." 9. Chapter XX of Act deals with Appeals and Revisions. Part 'CC' thereof, deals with Appeals to High Court and Section 260A and Section 269 of Act are thereof. Section 260A of Act is as under: "Appeal to High Court. 260A.(1) appeal shall lie to High Court from every order passed in appeal by Appellate Tribunal [before date of establishment of National Tax Tribunal], if High Court is satisfied that case involves substantial question of law. (2) [The [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or] assessee aggrieved by any order passed by Appellate Tribunal may file appeal to High Court and such appeal under this sub-section shall be (a) filed within one hundred and twenty days from date on which order appealed against is [received by assessee or [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner]; (b) [***] (c) in form of memorandum of appeal precisely stating therein substantial question of law involved. 14 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc (2A) High Court may admit appeal after expiry of period of one hundred and twenty days referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (2), if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing same within that period. (3) Where High Court is satisfied that substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question. (4) appeal shall be heard only on question so formulated, and respondents shall, at hearing of appeal, be allowed to argue that case does not involve such question : Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge power of court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that case involves such question. (5) High Court shall decide question of law so formulated and deliver such judgment thereon containing grounds on which such decision is founded and may award such cost as it deems fit. (6) High Court may determine any issue which (a) has not been determined by Appellate Tribunal; or (b) has been wrongly determined by Appellate Tribunal, by reason of decision on such question of law as is referred to in sub-section (1). [(7) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), relating to appeals to High Court shall, as far as may be, apply in case of appeals under this section.] Section 269 of Act defines High Court and is as under:- 269.In this Chapter, "High Court" means 15 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc (i) in relation to any State, High Court for that State ; (ii) in relation to Union territory of Delhi, High Court of Delhi ; (iia) [***] (iii) [***] (iv) in relation to Union territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, High Court at Calcutta ; (v) in relation to Union territory of Lakshadweep, High Court of Kerala ; (va) in relation to Union territory of Chandigarh, High Court of Punjab and Haryana ; (vi) in relation to Union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, High Court at Bombay ; and (vii) in relation to Union territory of Pondicherry, High Court at Madras." 10. examination of above provisions, would reveal that Chapter XIII of Act deals with Income Tax Authorities. Part-A of Chapter XIII of Act deals with their appointment and control, Part B of Chapter XIII of Act deals with jurisdiction of Authorities under Act and Part C deals with powers of Authorities under Act as specified in Part of Chapter XIII. Section 116 of Act exhaustively lists out classes of Income Tax Authorities under Act. Tribunal and High Court do not find mention as Income Tax Authorities, there under i.e. under Section 116 of Act. Section 120,124 and 127 of 16 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Act are part of Part B of Chapter XIII of Act and provides for jurisdiction of authorities. Section 120 provides for jurisdiction of Income Tax Authorities listed out in Section 116 of Act. scope and ambit of jurisdiction is decided by highest Income Tax Authority viz. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). Authorities under Act shall perform/ exercise all powers under Act as are assigned to it by CBDT, and in assigning such powers, it shall have regard to various criteria such as territorial area, persons or classes of persons, income or classes of income and cases or classes of cases. Section 124 of Act deals with jurisdiction of Assessing Officers, inter alia, with regard to assessment of parties. Section 127 of Act deals with transfer of jurisdiction of assessment from one assessing officer to another. This power to transfer jurisdiction of assessment proceedings (cases) is with regard to transferring assessment proceedings from one Assessing Officer to another subject to satisfaction of conditions mentioned therein. 11 bare reading of above provisions will 17 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc establish that Chapter XIII of Act would be applicable only to Income Tax Authorities under Act as listed out in Section 116 thereof. Thus, it follows that provisions of Section 120, 124 and 127 of Act will also apply only to Authorities listed in Section 119 of Act. Tribunal and High Court are not listed in Section 116 of Act as Income Tax Authorities under Act. Therefore, Sections 124 and 127 of Act being relied upon by Revenue can have no bearing while dealing with issue of which High Court will have jurisdiction over orders of Tribunal. 12 jurisdiction of Court which will hear appeals from orders passed by Tribunal, would be governed by provisions of Chapter XX of Act which is specific provision dealing with appeals, amongst others to High Court. In particular Section 260A and 269 of Act, when read together would mean that High Court referred to in Section 260A of Act will be High Court as provided/ defined in Section 269 of Act i.e. in relation to any State, High Court of that State. Therefore, seat of Tribunal (in which State) would decide jurisdiction of 18 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Court to which appeal would lie under Act. Thus, in present facts, High Court which would have jurisdiction over place where Tribunal (when not exercising jurisdiction over more than one State) is situated and passed order. Therefore, in facts of this case, on bare examination of provisions, it would be clear that in case of orders passed by Banglore Bench of Tribunal, appeal from such orders would lie only to Karnataka High Court at Bangalore. 13 submission on behalf of Revenue that seat of Assessing Officer alone would decide jurisdiction of High Court on basis of Section 127 of Act, is misplaced. This for reasons that bare reading of provisions show that Court to which appeal would lie is not governed by seat of Assessing Officer. It for this reason that, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Rules specifically provides in Rule 4(i) thereof, Bench which shall hear appeals, filed before it in terms of Section 253 of Act, shall be decided by President of Tribunal. Therefore, which bench / seat of 19 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Tribunal will hear appeals is not decided by seat of Assessing Officer as provided in Section 127 of Act, as it does not apply in case of Tribunal as it is not Income Tax Authority under Act. It is President of Tribunal in exercise of his powers under Rule 4(1) of ITAT Rules, issued standing order No.63/97 dated 2.7.2013 as amended, inter alia, providing jurisdiction of bench dependent upon areas from where impugned orders have originated. In above standing order, Note 4 specifically states that jurisdiction of bench will not be determined by place of business or residence of assessee but by location of office of Assessing Officer. If seat of Assessing Officer were in terms of Section 127 of Act, to govern/ control jurisdiction of Authorities other than those listed in Section 116 of Act, then specific provision in terms of Note 4 in standing order issued by President of Tribunal was not called for / required. Thus in terms, above standing order where assessment proceedings have been transferred from one place to another under Section 127 of Act, then bench of Tribunal before which appeals 20 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc would lie, may shift with seat of Assessing Officer before filing/ hearing of appeal. Moreover, it is important to note that, Bombay High Court Rules while providing for appeals from Tribunal does not specifically exclude its jurisdiction in case of orders passed by Tribunal at Mumbai or provide for court entertaining appeals dependent upon seat of Assessing Officer at time of filing appeal. In fact, inter se, distribution of Appeals between different benches of this court is on basis from where appeal originated. Therefore, Appellate Court from which appeal would lie from order of Tribunal would necessarily be High Court exercising jurisdiction over places where Tribunal which passed order, is situated. 14 above plain reading of provisions is also supported by jurisdictional / constitutional principles. Tribunal which passes orders is bound by orders passed by jurisdictional High Court where Tribunal is situated. In above view, in present facts, Tribunal which passed impugned order is situated in Bangalore. 21 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Therefore, Tribunal would be bound by orders passed by Karnataka High Court at Bangalore. However, it is likely that there could be divergence of opinion between two High Courts on particular issue, one view by Court where Tribunal is situated i.e. Bangalore and other view by Court where Assessing Officer is now situated i.e. Pune, leading to incongruous situation. On what paramaters would High Court to which appeal is filed on basis of where seat of transferee Assessing Officer is situated by virtue of Section 127 of Act would apply to order of Tribunal passed at seat of transferor Assessing Officer in this case by Bangalore Bench of Tribunal. Thus, Parliament keeping in view fact that, all Authorities/ Tribunals functioning within particular State are bound by view of High Court of that State. This has been so provided in terms of Section 260A read with 269 of Act. It is, therefore, for above reason that orders passed by Tribunal are subject to appeal before High Court under which it exercises jurisdiction. If submission of Revenue is to be accepted, then we would have peculiar situation where 22 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc powers under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution, would be exercised by Court which exercises jurisdiction over seat of Tribunal which is passing order while for purposes of appeal under Act, Court which would entertain appeal would be Court different from Court which would exercise jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution. It is to be noted that, for relief under Article 226 of Constitution, no part of case of action would have arisen in Mumbai giving rise to jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, harmonious reading of various provisions of law would require that appeal from order of Tribunal is to be filed to Court which exercises jurisdiction over seat of Tribunal. 15 In this case, Karnataka High Court exercises jurisdiction over Banglore bench of Tribunal which has passed impugned order dated 30 th July, 2015. However, it may be pointed that Explanation to Section 127 of Act states that once direction has been issued therein in respect of case i.e. Section 127 of Act, then all Assessment proceedings under Act in respect of any 23 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc year which may be pending on date of such order or which have been completed on or before such date would stand transferred to transferee assessing officer. words "all proceedings under this Act would not cover appeals under Act before High Court as it would run counter to Section 260A and 269 of Act which provides specifically for High Court which would have jurisdiction over orders of Tribunal. Thus, words "all proceedings under this Act have to be harmoniously read with other provisions of Act and have to be restricted only to proceedings under Act before authorities listed in Section 116 of Act. Any other interpretation would render Section 269 of Act otois. In fact, Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of CIT v/s. Parke Davis (I) Ltd reported in 239 ITR 820 (AP) has dealt with this very submission in context of Reference application and inter alia after examining explanation to Section 127 held as under:- "The words 'All proceedings under Act in respect of any year' occurring in Explanation cannot be understood in vacuum and cannot be stretched to cover reference applications already filed or decided by date of transfer under Section 127. " 24 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc situation would not be different while dealing with appeal under Section 260A of Act. We are in respectful agreement with decision of Andhra Pradesh in case of Parke Davis (I) Ltd (supra). Therefore, in our view, Section 127 of Act and explanation thereto only apply to authorities listed under Section 116 of Act and exercising jurisdiction under Act. It can have no application to High Court constituted under Constitution. 16 We shall now examine various decisions cited at bar and its applicability to present facts. decision in case of Sahara India Financial Corp Ltd (supra) relied by Revenue proceeded on explanation to Section 127(4) of Act to hold that where assessment proceedings were transferred from Lucknow to Delhi, it would only be Delhi High Court which could entertain appeal from order of Tribunal after date of transfer of assessment proceedings under Section 127 of Act. We respectfully note that aforesaid decision of Delhi High Court has not considered 25 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc provisions of Section 260A and 269 of Act. In our view, applicability of provisions of Section 127 of Act is only restricted to authorities listed under Section 116 of Act and will not govern jurisdiction of High Court. jurisdiction of High Court would be decided on application of Sections 260A and 269 of Act. Similarly, decision of Delhi High Court in case of AAR Bee Industries (supra) relied upon by Revenue noticed different view taken by Punjab & Haryana High Court in Motorola India Ltd (supra). However, it held itself bound by decision of its co-ordinate bench in case of Sahara India Financial Services (supra) to hold that Section 127 of Act will govern/ decide Court which will exercise jurisdiction in respect of appeals from order of Tribunal. We respectfully disagree with above view of Delhi High Court. In our view, Section 127 of Act can only govern / control jurisdiction of Income Tax Authorities as defined in Section 116 of Act. Therefore, appeals from order of Tribunal to High Court would be governed by section 260-A and 269 of Act. 26 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc 17 We note that Punjab & Haryana High Court in Motorola India Ltd (supra) has examined identical issue and on examination of Section 127 of Act, it held as under:- "14. conjoint reading of aforementioned provisions makes it evident that Director General or Chief CIT or CIT is empowered to transfer any case from one or more AOs subordinate to him to any other AO. It also deals with procedure when case is transferred from one AO subordinate to Director General or Chief CIT or CIT to AO who is not subordinate to same Director General, Chief CIT or CIT. aforementioned situation and definition of expression 'case' in relation to jurisdiction of AO is quite understandable but it has got nothing to do with territorial jurisdiction of Tribunal or High Courts merely because Section 127 of Act dealing with transfer has been incorporated in same chapter. Therefore, argument raised is completely devoid of substance and we have no hesitation to reject same." 18 On interpretation of Section 127 of Act, it held that it has nothing to do with territorial jurisdiction of High Court as it only deals with transfer of assessee's case from one Assessing Officer to another Assessing Officer. Similarly, Calcutta High Court J.L. Morrioson (I) Ltd (supra) has on application of section 260-A and 269 of Act held that High Court where Tribunal is seated will be appropriate High Court for purpose of appeal under 27 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc Section 260A of Act Both these orders deal with issue which arise in this appeal i.e which Court would have jurisdiction to entertain appeal from order of Tribunal passed in Banglore whether Bombay High Court or Karnataka High Court. In similar situation, both Courts have held that it would be Court which exercises jurisdiction over seat of Tribunal which passed order which would have jurisdiction. 19 Therefore, for reasons set out in this order, we respectfully do not agree with view of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sahara India Financial Corporation (supra) and AAR Bee (supra). Our view is in consonance with views of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Motorola (supra) and Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Motorola (supra). 20 Therefore, in present facts, we uphold preliminary objections of respondent. We hold that this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain appeals under Section 260A of Act in respect of order dated 30 th July, 2015 passed by Bangalore bench of Tribunal. Thus, 28 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: 2. os itxa 1142 16.doc this appeal is not maintainable before this Court. 21 In above view, appeal is returned to appellant to take appropriate steps in accordance with order of this Court, as it may be advised. Appeal disposed of in above terms. [ M.S. SANKLECHA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ] 29 of 29 ::: Uploaded on - 07/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 08/03/2019 10:32:04 ::: Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax -3, Pune v. Sungard Solutions (I) Pvt Ltd