What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the current appeal as it had become infructuous. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn/infructuous.

The assessee filed an appeal which was later found to have a defect. A compliance filing was made, but it was inadvertently registered as a separate appeal. This separate appeal was already heard and allowed by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the current appeal is infructuous given that a similar appeal involving identical issues has already been allowed.

Govindaswamy Sumangala, Bengaluru vs ITO | ITAT Bangalore 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Appellant: Shri Surajmal Daga, AR

For Respondent: Shri N Balusamy, JCIT (DR)

Hearing: 25.06.2026Pronounced: 06.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.328/Bang/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Govindaswamy Sumangala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Palace Road, Ward – 1(2)(5), Bengaluru. Bengaluru. PAN – AYQPS 5023 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Surajmal Daga, AR Revenue by : Shri N Balusamy, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 25.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06.07.2026 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre relating to Assessment Year 2017-18. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the present appeal had originally been filed on 29.01.2026.

Pursuant to a defect notice issued by the Registry, a compliance/defect-removal application was filed by the assessee. Owing to an inadvertent registration by the Registry, the said compliance filing came to be numbered separately as ITA No. 515/Bang/2026. It was submitted that both ITA No. 328/Bang/2026 and ITA No. 515/Bang/2026

ITA No.328/Bang/2026 Page 2 of 3 pertain to the same assessee, the same assessment year, and involve identical issues and grounds of appeal. The learned AR further submitted that ITA No. 515/Bang/2026 was heard by this Tribunal on 07.05.2026 and disposed of vide order dated 21.05.2026, whereby the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

2.1 In view of the aforesaid facts, the learned AR submitted that the present appeal has become infructuous and sought permission to withdraw the same. The learned Departmental Representative did not raise any serious objection to the said request.

We have considered the submissions of both parties and perused the materials on record. Since the issues involved in the present appeal have already been adjudicated by the Tribunal in ITA No. 515/Bang/2026 and the assessee has sought withdrawal of the present appeal as having become infructuous, we permit the withdrawal and dismiss the appeal as infructuous.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn/infructuous.

Order pronounced in court on 6th day of July, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 6th July, 2026 / vms /

ITA No.328/Bang/2026 Page 3 of 3

Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore

GOVINDASWAMY SUMANGALA,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(5), BENGALURU

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments