M.S. Sanklecha, J.

1. This appeal under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short), challenges the order dated 30-07-2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Banglore Bench, Banglore (“the Tribunal” for short). This appeal relates to Assessment Year 2008-09.

2. At the very outset before we could consider the questions of law raised by the Revenue in this appeal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent raised a preliminary objection. The objection being about the maintainability of this appeal before this Court.

3. In support of its objections, Mr. Murlidhar on behalf of the respondent submits that the impugned order dated 30-07-2015 has been passed by the Banglore Bench of the Tribunal. Thus, the appeal from the order of Banglore Bench of the Tribunal would lie before the Karnataka High Court and not before this Court. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon Chapter XX of the Act and, in particular Section 260A and 269 of the Act.

4. In response, Mr. Tejveer Singh, the learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal states that this Court would alone have jurisdiction, in view of the facts giving rise to the present appeal. Our attention was drawn to the following facts:-

(a). The order of the Tribunal at Banglore was passed on 30-07-2015;

(b). On 08-09-2015, an order was passed under Section 127 of the Act transferring the respondent assessee's case from an Assessing Officer at Banglore to an Assessing Officer at Pune;

(c). This appeal was filed in this Court on 04-01-2006. On the aforesaid facts, it is submitted that this Court will alone have jurisdiction to deal with the respondent assesssee's case. This at the Assessment proceedings of the respondent are now in Mumbai consequent to the order dated 8th September, 2015 passed under Section 127 of the Act.

5. On the aforesaid facts, Mr. Tejveer Singh, for the Revenue in support contented that this Court will have jurisdiction, made the following submissions:-

(a). It is the situs of the Assessing Officer which will alone determine the High Court which would have jurisdiction over the orders of the Tribunal under Section 260 - A of the Act. In this case, the seat of the Assessing Officer at the time of filing this appeal is Pune. Therefore, this Court would alone be the appropriate High Court to deal with this appeal.

(b). In terms of Section 127 of the Act, the assessment proceedings were transferred from the Assessing Officer at Banglore to the Assessing Officer in Pune. The entire assessment proceedings (whether completed or pending) both before and after the transfer, also stands transferred to the Assessing Officer at Pune by virtue of the explanation thereto. Therefore, in terms thereof, all proceeding under the Act stand transferred to the transferee Assessing Officer at Pune, even in respect of cases where assessments are already completed; and

(c). In any case, the issue now stands settled in favour of the Revenue by the decisions of the Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd., 294 ITR 363 (Delhi) and CIT Vs. AAR Bee Industries, (2013) 357 ITR 542 (Delhi). In both the above cases, on identical fact situation, the Court held that consequent to transfer of the assessment proceedings under Section 127 of the Act, the orders of the Tribunal under Section 260A of the Act are to be challenged at the place where the transferee Assessing Officer exercises jurisdiction. In the case of Sahara India Financial Corp Ltd (supra) a transfer under Section 127 of the Act, the Assessment Proceedings were transferred from Lucknow to Delhi. The Court held that in such case, appeal from Lucknow bench of the Tribunal would be before the Delhi High Court. Similarly, in case of transfer of assessment proceeding under Section 127 of the Act, from Jammu to Delhi in case of AAR Bee Industries (supra) led the Court to hold Delhi High court would have jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the order of the Amritsar bench of