TARUN MAHAJAN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-24(4), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1592/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 December 2024AY 2009-10Bench: BEFORESHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 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 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the CIT(A)'s order. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) had already adjudicated the assessee's main appeal on the same date and that the assessee's counsel could not rebut this fact, leading to the dismissal of the current appeal to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)-NFAC's order for AY 2009-10, passed after proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) had rejected the assessee's appeal, citing that multiple appeals were filed for the same assessment year, one had already been decided, and the assessee failed to furnish required documents for the present appeal despite requests.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting an appeal due to multiple filings for the same assessment year, prior adjudication of a main appeal, and non-submission of required documents.

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, DELHI (SMC

Hearing: 18.12.2024Pronounced: 18.12.2024

Date of hearing 18.12.2024 Date of pronouncement 18.12.2024 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)-NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060794587(1) dated 12.02.2024 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It is noticed at the outset that learned CIT(A)-NFAC has rejected assessee’s lower appeal as under :

“On perusal of the records, it is seen that the old diverted charge has uploaded four separate appeals for the same assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2009-10. The disputed demand of Rs.17,04,306/-, name, address, PAN of the appellant etc. are all identical. One appeal has already been decided by the undersigned vide order dated 12.02.2024 (NFAC/2008-09/10000986). In the other three identical appeals, the appellant has not furnished/uploaded any documents related to the instant appeal, like Form No. 35, Grounds of Appeal

, Statement of Facts, Demand Notice etc. despite request having been made vide notice dated 01.02.2024.”

4. Learned counsel hardly could rebut the clinching fact that the CIT(A) had already decided assessee’s main appeal vide his earlier order of the same date, i.e., 12/02/2024 and therefore, his impugned order is upheld so as to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →