DEBASHREE PRIYADARSHINI SETHY,KENDRAPARA vs. ITO WARD, KENDRAPARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 154/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 August 2024AY 2017-183 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT noted that one of the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No.132/CTK/2024 had already been decided. Since the present appeal (ITA No.154/CTK/2024) arose from the same assessment order and was identical in nature, it had become infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee inadvertently filed two appeals before the CIT(A) against the same assessment order. The CIT(A) passed two separate orders, partly allowing both appeals. The assessee then filed two separate appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal that has become infructuous due to a prior decision on an identical matter should be dismissed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 05/08/2024Pronounced: 05/08/2024

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 16.01.2024, in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1059784842(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018.

2.

As per the office note, there is a delay of 14 days in filing the appeal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with Affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for condonation of delay. Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 14 days in filing the present appeal and the appeal is heard and disposed off finally on merits.

3.

At the outset, it is found that the assessee inadvertently has filed two appeals against the assessment order dated 29.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Kendrapara, before the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Centre (NFAC), which was decided by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi vide two separate orders both dated 16.01.2024, wherein both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed.

4.

As two separate orders were passed by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, therefore, the assessee has preferred two separate appeals before us arising out of the same assessment order dated 29.12.2019. Since we have already decided the appeal of the assessee in today i.e. on 05.08.2024 allowing the additional ground of appeal

, therefore, the present appeal being ITA No.154/CTK/2024 borne out of the same assessment order, has become infructuous and, therefore, is hereby dismissed.

5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 05/08/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (MANISH AGARWAL) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 05/08/2024 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतलऱपऩ अग्रेपषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant-

1. Debashree Priadarshini Sethy, C/o-Prahlad Sethy Kansar, Via-Baldadevjew, Kendrapara-754212 प्रत्यथी / The Respondent-

2. ITO, Ward Kendrapara, Kendrapara आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 3.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →