What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the present appeal was a duplicate of a previously filed appeal. The Tribunal confirmed that it was a duplicate appeal and dismissed the present appeal.

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was discovered that the assessee had filed two appeals against the same impugned order, one physically and one online.

What were the issues?

Whether the present appeal is a duplicate and hence liable for dismissal.

Prime Hygiene Papers Private… vs DCIT | ITAT Mumbai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYASHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, CIT-DR

Date of Hearing – 21/08/2025 Date of Order - 21/08/2025

O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.

The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 16.05.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2011-12.

At the outset, we find that against the same impugned order, the assessee has filed two appeals, i.e., one filed physically, being ITA No.4493/Mum./2025, and the other online, i.e., the present appeal. During the hearing, the learned DR also confirmed the fact that it is a duplicate appeal. Accordingly, the assessee’s present appeal, being ITA No.4499/Mum./2025, is dismissed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/08/2025

PRIME HYGIENE PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KALBADEVI ROAD vs. DCIT 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments