CHETANS BHADRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 32(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3295/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 August 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)1 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 Tribunal noted that the present appeal (ITA No. 3295/Mum/2025) was a duplicate filing of an appeal already heard. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the present appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against the same order of the Ld.CIT(A) due to a technical oversight, one online and one physically. One appeal (ITA No. 2798/Mum/2025) had already been heard.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed as a duplicate of an already heard appeal can be withdrawn as infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

Assessment Year : 2011-12 Chetan S. Bhadra (HUF), Income Tax Officer, 501, Beach Apartment, Ward-32(1)(2), Balraj Sahani Road, vs. 218, Kautilya Bhavan, Opp: Novotel Hotel, Bandra Kurla Complex, Juhu, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400049. Mumbai-400051. PAN : AACHC1893H (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vimal Punmiya For Revenue : Mr. Virabhadra S.Mahajan, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 25-08-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 25-08-2025 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 08-08-2023, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12.

2.

During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the present appeal has been filed twice due to technical oversight. It was submitted that one appeal was filed on-line and the second was filed in physical mode and one of the appeals in has already been heard by the Co-ordinate „C‟ Bench of the Tribunal on 09-06-2025 and it was accordingly requested that the present appeal being a duplicate appeal may be allowed to be withdrawn as infructuous.

3.

The Ld.DR has been heard, who has not raised any specific objection, where the appeal is allowed to be withdrawn.

4.

Heard both the parties and considering the limited prayer raised on behalf of the assessee, since the appeal filed electronically by the assessee against the same impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) having has already been heard on 09-06-2025 and another set of the same appeal i.e., the present appeal had been inadvertently filed and registered at and, therefore, the same being duplicate in nature, is dismissed as infructuous.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →