What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeal was a duplicate and therefore infructuous/non-maintainable. Consequently, the appeal was held to be infructuous and allowed to be withdrawn.

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). It was brought to the Tribunal's notice that this appeal was a duplicate of another appeal already filed and heard.

What were the issues?

Whether a duplicate appeal, which is identical to an appeal already heard, is maintainable.

Abuthahir Safiullah vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 24.04.2025Pronounced: 26.05.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Delhi, dated 27.01.2025 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as "AY”) 2011-12.

At the outset, it has been brought to our notice that this appeal is duplicate copy of the very same appeal filed in the e-portal and the other appeal [ITA No.449/Chny/2025] has been heard by ‘B’ Bench of this Tribunal as on today i.e.24.04.2025. Therefore, having taken judicial (AY 2011-12) Abuthahir Safiullah notice of the above facts, we find that the captioned duplicate appeal had to be held to be infructuous/non-maintainable in the light of the other appeal.

In the result, the ibid appeal filed by the assessee is held to be infructuous and allowed to be withdrawn.

Order pronounced on the 26th day of May, 2025, in Chennai.

ABUTHAHIR SAFIULLAH,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI

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