Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, Hon’ble & Dr. M. L. Meena, Hon’ble]
ORDER Per A.T. Varkey, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Asansol dated 23.09.2014 for AY 2010-11.
None appeared for the assessee.
However, there is a history behind the appeal, it is noted that the assessee had preferred two appeals against the same impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 23.09.2014 for AY 2010-11. The other appeal was as which was disposed of first on 30.10.2019 whereby the assessment was restored to the file of AO for de novo consideration.
4. Thereafter appeal of the assessee against the same order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 23.09.2014 which was numbered as (i.e. the present case) was disposed of on 22.01.2020 remitting the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A). However the department thereafter moved a miscellaneous application for clarification/ mistake apparent on the face of the record since there were two orders against the order of Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2010-11 dated 23.09.2014, one remitting the assessment back to the AO for de-novo assessment in and second one restoring the appeal back to the Ld. CIT(A) in . In the said miscellaneous application the Tribunal passed an order dated 01.04.2021, wherein it was pleased to hold as under:
“Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee directed against the very same order of the ld. CIT(A) dt. 23/09/2014 in appeal no. 169/CIT(A)/Al/W-3(1)/Asl/13-14.
2. The assessee had filed two separate appeals on the same order of the ld. CIT(A) for the same Assessment Year and these were numbered 751/Kol/2019. Only one challan fees of Rs. 10,000/- was paid for both these appeals bearing challan no. 02041 dt. 02/04/2019. The registry wrongly gave two numbers and treated them as two separate appeals. was heard on 21/10/2019 and disposed of on 30/10/2019. Thus, this appeal of the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dt. 23/09/2014, stands disposed off by the Bench. ITA No. 726/Kol/2019, was heard on 16/01/2020 and disposed off on 22/01/2020. As the appeal for the Assessment Year 2010-11 was against the same order of the ld. CIT(A) dt. 23/09/2014, which was already disposed by the Tribunal on 30/10/2019 in ITA No. 751/Kol/2019, it is a mistake on part of the Tribunal to once again pass an order disposing off the appeal in ITA No. 726/Kol/2019, vide order dt. 22/01/2020.
3. Thus, we recall our order in dt. 22/01/2020. This recalled order in is dismissed for the reason that the appeal against the very same order of the ld. CIT(A) in ITA No. 751/Kol/2019 had already been disposed off on 30/10/2019. The order of the ITAT in ITA No. 751/Kol/2019, dt. 30/10/2019 stands.
Ordered accordingly.”
5. From the aforesaid action of the Tribunal it is self-explanatory that this appeal i.e. No. 751/Kol/2019 filed against the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 23.09.2014 was disposed of by this Tribunal on 30.10.2019 and subsequently only the order was passed by the Tribunal in which was passed on 30.10.2019 and therefore this appeal of the assessee become infructuous and it is clarified that the order of this Tribunal in ITA No. 751/Kol/2019 dated 30.10.2019 only survives.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose as held in dated 30.10.2019.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 11th August, 2021.