RAJAGOPAL GOVINDASWAMI KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -APPEALS, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 196/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 March 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant 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 was inadvertently filed electronically after a physical appeal was already filed. Therefore, the duplicate appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2017-18 arising from an order of the NFAC. The assessee's Authorized Representative informed the tribunal that the present appeal was a duplicate, as a physical appeal had already been filed earlier.

What were the issues?

Whether a duplicate appeal filed inadvertently is maintainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 19.03.2025Pronounced: 19.03.2025

आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 25.11.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 31.12.2019.

1.

:- 2 -: 2. At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (A.R.) for the assessee, vide letter dated 17.03.2025, stated that the present appeal is a duplicate appeal, as the assessee had already filed a physical appeal on 23.01.2025. Subsequently, an employee of his office inadvertently filed the present appeal through electronic mode. In light of this, the Ld. A.R. requested that the duplicate appeal be dismissed.

3.

When this was pointed out to Ld. D.R, she has not raised any objection.

4.

We have perused the materials available on record. It is evident that the present appeal was inadvertently filed in electronic mode after the assessee had already filed a physical appeal on 23.01.2025. Accordingly, the duplicate appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable and is dismissed. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →