What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the arguments of the Revenue's counsel. It was noted that similar appeals for the same assessment years had already been disposed of by the Tribunal.

The Revenue filed five appeals against the common order of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2010-11 to 2014-15. The Revenue's counsel submitted that these appeals were duplicate and not maintainable.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue were maintainable as they were claimed to be duplicate filings.

ACIT vs M/S Cholamandalam Financial… | ITAT Chennai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE- & SHRI G.MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 13.09.2022

आदेश / O R D E R

PER G. MANJUNATHA, AM: These five appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against common order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Chennai, dated 28.06.2019 and relevant to assessment years 2010-11 to 2014-15.

At the time of hearing, learned CIT DR present for the Revenue submitted that these appeals filed by the Revenue are duplicate and thus, not maintainable, because Registry of the Tribunal has inadvertently re-numbered the appeals, when the Revenue has filed revised Form 36 along with grounds of appeal. However, the appeals filed by the Revenue for very same assessment years have already been disposed off by the Tribunal vide its order dated 24.06.2022 and thus, these appeals become infructuous and not maintainable.

Therefore, considering arguments of the learned CIT DR, we dismiss these appeals filed by the Revenue as duplicate and not maintainable.

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE - 8, CHENNAI vs. M/S CHOLAMANDALAM FINANCIAL HOLDINGS LTD, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments