PANDURANG ANADA MATALE ,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 3(2), NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2961/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 May 2026AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the present appeal was indeed a duplicate of an earlier appeal that had already been heard. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on this ground.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order for AY 2012-13. The assessee later stated that this appeal was a duplicate of another appeal already heard by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is a duplicate of an already heard appeal before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Hearing: 19.05.2026Pronounced: 21.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2961/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Pandurang Ananda Matale, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Shivprasad Bunglow, Ward-3(2), Nashik Plot No.08, Opp. Mayur Hospital, Kamathwade, Nashik-422010 Maharashtra PAN : AHZPM4873F Appellant Respondent

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia Date of hearing : 19.05.2026 Date of pronouncement : 21.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 01.10.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 23.12.2019 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. However, a noting of the Bench dated 08.04.2026 has been placed on record through which assessee has stated that the present appeal is a duplicate appal and that another appeal bearing ITA

ITA No.2961/PUN/2025 Pandurang Ananda Matale No.2902/PUN/2025 has already been heard by this Tribunal on 08.04.2026. We therefore taking note of the above noting made by the Bench on 08.04.2026 and after having examined the record of ITA No.2902/PUN/2025 are of the considered view that the present appeal is duplicate appeal as the very same order of ld.CIT(A) has been challenged in ITA No.2902/PUN/2025 and the same has already been heard on 08.04.2026 and reserved for order. Under these given facts and circumstances, the appeal deserves to be dismissed as duplicate.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 21st day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 21st May, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.05.26 13:57:25 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →