PIERRE JULIAN JOHN DSOUZA,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5808/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 October 2026AY 2020-212 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the assessee's submission that the appeal was filed inadvertently and was a duplicate of another appeal, ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026, which had already been heard. The assessee explicitly requested the withdrawal of the present appeal. The Revenue did not raise any objection to this request. Therefore, in accordance with the assessee's request and the absence of objection from the revenue, the Tribunal found it appropriate to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the assessee, Pierre Julian John Dsouza, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated March 9, 2026, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The appeal was heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench "C". The assessee's counsel stated that the present appeal was filed inadvertently and was a duplicate of another appeal, ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026, which had already been heard. Consequently, the assessee requested the withdrawal of the present appeal. The Departmental Representative (DR) did not object to this request.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, ITA No. 5808/Mum/2026, should be dismissed as withdrawn, given the assessee's submission that it was filed inadvertently and was a duplicate of another appeal (ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026) which had already been heard. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the appeal was filed inadvertently and was a duplicate of ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026, which had already been heard. Therefore, the assessee requested the withdrawal of the present appeal. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue did not object to the assessee's request for withdrawal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Om Prakash Kant (AM) & Smt. Debjani Mitra Neogy (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Agarwal
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Soneji
Hearing: 01.10.2026Pronounced: 06.10.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI

Before Shri Om Prakash Kant (AM) & Smt. Debjani Mitra Neogy (JM)

ITA No. 5808/Mum/2026 (A.Y. 2020-21)

Pierre Julian John Dsouza Vs. DCIT, Circle-22(1) 302 ALF building, Gokhale Piramal Chamber Road South, Mumbai Mumbai-400 012. 400 028. PAN : AAAPD9304J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Shri Shyam Agarwal Respondent by Shri Ajay Soneji Date of Hearing 01.10.2026 Date of Pronouncement 06.10.2026

ORDER Per Debjani Mitra Neogy (JM) :

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short CIT(A)] dated 09.03.2026 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) for assessment year (in short ‘A.Y.’) 2020-21.

2.

At the time of hearing Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the present appeal is filed inadvertently and duplicate of appeal of ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026. He intimated that ITA No. 4160/Mum/2026 has already heard on 03/08/2026 and therefore the present appeal, the assessee has made request for withdrawal. Ld. DR did not object to the same. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

3.

In the result, appeal in ITA No. 5808/Mum/2026 is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 06.10.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (DEBJANI MITRA NEOGY) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai : Dated 06.10.2026

2 ITA No. 5808/Mum/2026 Pierre Julian John Dsouza

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. CIT-concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file By order Digitally signed by ABHINAV ANANT ABHINAV ANANT GAVANDE GAVANDE Date: 2026.10.15 17:11:24 +05'30' (Dy/Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →