CHETANS BHADRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 32(1)(2), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI
Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARYAssessment Year : 2011-12
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 ITA No. 2798/Mum/2025 has already
2
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and it was accordingly requested that the present appeal being a duplicate appeal may be allowed to be withdrawn as infructuous.
The Ld.DR has been heard, who has not raised any specific objection, where the appeal is allowed to be withdrawn.
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 ITA No. 2798/Mum/2025, 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 ITA No. 3295/Mum/2025 and, therefore, the same being duplicate in nature, is dismissed as infructuous.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2025. [RAHUL CHAUDHARY] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai,
Dated: 25-08-2025
TNMM
3
Copy to :
1)
The Appellant
2)
The Respondent
3)
The CIT concerned
4)
The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai
5)
Guard file
By Order
Dy./Asst.