The AO situated in Mumbai passed the assessment order and the appeal was filed before CIT(A). The jurisdiction of the AO was transferred from Mumbai to Delhi and thus, subsequently, the CIT(A) delhi decided the Appeal and passed the order which was challenged before the ITAT Delhi bench. The issue of maintainability arose and the ITAT held that  as per  Rule 4 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 and paragraph 4 of Notification No. F.No.63-AD(AT/97), dated 16/09/1997 as amended from time to time. The   jurisdiction of the Bench which can decide the appeal is to be determined by the location of the Assessing Officer passing an assessment order. In the present case, the location of the AO in the instant proceeding was at Mumbai, the appeals, necessarily, should have been filed before Mumbai Benches and not in Delhi Benches. The reference was made to the view expressed by the Supreme Court in PCIT v. ABC Papers Ltd., [2022] 289 taxman 150(SC). The ITAT held that the appeal before the Delhi bench was not maintainable. However, since the Appellant was filed under the bona fide belief, the ITAT Delhi bench granted liberty to the assessee to file an appeal before the Mumbai bench.  (ITA No.2168/De 1/2019 dt.  24/03/2023 ) ( AY. 201-11     )