SHANKAR RAJARAM NEELAM ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1201/MUM/2026Status: HeardITAT Mumbai06 March 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (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 assessee requested to withdraw the current appeal to avoid duplication and rectify the inadvertent mistake. The Departmental Representative had no objection to the assessee's prayer. The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 25.11.2025. The assessee later filed an application to withdraw the appeal, stating that they had inadvertently filed two appeals. One was filed in e-form (ITA 1156/MUM/2026) and the other in physical form (ITA 1201/MUM/2026).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be permitted to withdraw the appeal due to inadvertent filing of duplicate appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.03.2026Pronounced: 06.03.2026

O R D E R

Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, AM:

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 25.11.2025 of first appellate authority, pertaining to assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16.

2.

The assessee has filed an application dated 02.03.2026, seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. The contents of the said letter are as under: Sub: Request for withdrawal of physical appeal filed in duplicate on 02.02.2026 (bearing The appellant is in receipt of penalty order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'] u/s, 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') dated 25.11.2025. Aggrieved against the said CIT(A) order, appellant had preferred appeal before your Honour. However, the appellant inadvertently filed two appeals (i.e. one in e-form and the other one in physical form). details are tabulated hereunder. Sr. No. Particulars Date of Filing Appeal No. 1 Appeal filed in e-form 31.01.2026 ITA 1156/MUM/2026 2 Appeal filed in 02.02.2026 ITA 1201/MUM/2026 physical - form

Shankar Rajaram Neelam vs. ITO In order to avoid duplication of the appeal and to rectify the inadvertent mistake occurred, the appellant wishes to withdraw the appeal bearing appeal no. ITA 1201/MUM/2026 which was physically filed. Considering the above, we request your Honour to kindly withdraw the captioned appeal pending before Honour. Trust your Honour would kindly accede to our request and oblige. Thanking you. Yours faithfully. Sd/- (Shankar Rajaram Neelam) Appellant 3. The learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR for short) for the Revenue has no objection to the assessee’s prayer.

4.

In view of the aforesaid, we are inclined to permit the assessee to withdraw the present appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →