Commissioner CGST, Gurugram vs. Ms Bharti Infratel LTD.

Facts

The appellant, the Commissioner CGST, Gurugram, filed a Special Тах Appeal (STA) before the High Court against an order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT's order related to an appeal where the Additional Director General of Central Intelligence (Adjudication Cell) was a respondent, but the present appellant was not a party to that proceeding. The appellant contended that the impugned order was passed by the CESTAT, New Delhi, and therefore, the appeal should lie before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Additional Director General of Central Intelligence (Adjudication Cell) is situated, which is R.K. Puram, New Delhi. The respondent is M/s Bharti Infratel Ltd.

Held

The High Court held that the present Special Tax Appeal (STA) is not maintainable before their court. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh vs. ABC Papers Limited, (2022) 9 SCC 1. The Supreme Court held that appeals against decisions of the ITAT shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the assessing officer who passed the assessment order is situated. This principle applies even if the case or cases are transferred in exercise of power under Section 127 of the Act; the High Court within whose jurisdiction the assessing officer has passed the order shall continue to exercise the jurisdiction of appeal. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable before them. However, it granted liberty to the appellant to make an appropriate application for condonation of delay before the concerned High Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present Special Tax Appeal is maintainable before this Court, considering the jurisdiction of the High Court for appeals against decisions of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the appeal is not maintainable before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. They relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh vs. ABC Papers Limited, (2022) 9 SCC 1. This precedent states that appeals against every decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the assessing officer who passed the assessment order is situated. The petitioner contended that this principle is applicable even if the cases are transferred under Section 127 of the Act. Therefore, the appeal should be filed before the High Court having jurisdiction over the assessing officer who passed the original order. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue.