Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal which was later found to be a duplicate of another appeal already filed and numbered. The assessee requested that the current appeal be dismissed as a duplicate.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the other appeal (ITA No. 4610/Mum/2023) was listed for hearing and the appellant had appeared. Therefore, accepting the assessee's request, the present appeal was dismissed as a duplicate.
Key Issues
Whether the present appeal should be dismissed as it is a duplicate of another appeal filed by the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, E BENCH, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Eastern Cargo Carriers (India) Private Limited Unit No. 26, Adarsh Industrial Estates, Sahar Road, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400099. [PAN: AAACE1520E] …………. Appellant Vs The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, …………. Respondent Mumbai-400020. Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : None For the Respondent/Department : Shri P.D.Chougule Date Conclusion of hearing : 14.08.2024 Pronouncement of order : 28.08.2024 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. By way of the present appeal the Assessee has challenged the order dated 28/06/2023, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as the „CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2011-12, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 20/12/2018, passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟).
When the Appeal was taken up for hearing, none was present on behalf of the Assessee/Appellant. After hearing the Learned Departmental Representative, the appeal was taken as heard. Assessment Year: 2021-22 Subsequently, a letter dated 26/08/2024, was filed by the Assessee wherein it was stated that the Appellant had filed the appeal in electric as well as physical form and inadvertently, both the appeals were numbered as ITA No. 4610/Mum/2023. The Assessee was having a bonafide belief that the appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2021-22, being was listed for hearing on 26/08/2024. Therefore, none has appeared before the Tribunal on hearing of appeal, being ITA No. 4572/Mum/2023, listed on 14/08/2024. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessee could not bring to the knowledge of the Tribunal that the present appeal was a duplicate appeal and that the Assessee had filed all relevant documents/details in ITA No. 4610/Mum/2023. In view of the aforesaid it was submitted that the present appeal be dismissed as being duplicate appeal.
We note that was listed before “E” Bench of the Tribunal on 26/8/2024, and that the Appellant had entered appearance before the Tribunal. Therefore, accepting the request of the Appellant, the present Appeal is dismissed as being a duplicate appeal with liberty to the Appellant to pursue the grounds raised in ITA No. 4610/Mum/2023 before the Tribunal.
In result, in terms of paragraph 3 above, the present Appeal is dismissed.