GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,DMD ADVOCATES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AIR INDIA BUILDING
Facts
The assessee filed an e-filing appeal along with a physical copy. The Registry inadvertently registered the physical copy separately. Upon verification, it was found that the present appeal was a duplicate of the already filed appeal.
Held
The assessee sought to withdraw the present appeal as it was found to be a duplicate filing. The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the appeal as infructuous.
Key Issues
Whether the present appeal, being a duplicate filing, is infructuous and liable for dismissal.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “I” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 24.03.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2018-19.
General Electric Company 2 ITA No. 1151/MUM/2024
Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that while e-filing appeal against the impugned order of ld CIT(A), a filing appeal against the impugned order of ld CIT(A), a filing appeal against the impugned order of ld CIT(A), a physical copy of the same was also filed , which has been physical copy of the same was also filed , which has been physical copy of the same was also filed , which has been inadvertently registered separately by the Registry , which being inadvertently registered separately by the Registry inadvertently registered separately by the Registry duplicate , the assessee sought to withdraw the same , the assessee sought to withdraw the same. After , the assessee sought to withdraw the same verification, the present appeal is found to be duplicate, therefore, verification, the present appeal is found to be duplicate, therefore, verification, the present appeal is found to be duplicate, therefore, the assessee is allowed to withdraw the same, and hence this the assessee is allowed to withdraw the same, and hence this the assessee is allowed to withdraw the same, and hence this appeal is dismissed as infructuous. as infructuous.
In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on nounced in the open Court on 30/08/2024. /08/2024. Sd/- - Sd/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30/08/2024 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ITAT, Mumbai
