INGRAM MICRO INDIA SSC PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT ,RANGE-14(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1243/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 June 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (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 Tribunal observed that the assessee may have inadvertently filed two appeals for the same order, making the instant appeal a duplicate. Therefore, the appeal is considered not maintainable or infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee has filed an appeal against an order passed by the Dispute Resolution Panel. Both parties submitted that the impugned order has already been adjudicated in an identical appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable when a similar appeal challenging the same order has already been adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144C(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SMT RENU JAUHRI

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule, A.R
For Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Hearing: 30.05Pronounced: 26.06

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 23.03.2021, impugned herein, passed by the Dispute Resolution Panel (in short Ld. DRP) under section 144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2016-17.

2.

At the outset, both the parties have submitted that the impugned order which is under challenge before this Bench in fact has already been adjudicated in an identical appeal i.e. by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 29.01.2024 and therefore the instant appeal does not require any adjudication.

M/s. Ingram Micro India SSC Private Limited

3.

Considering the submissions made by the parties, we observe that the Assessee may be inadvertently or on misconception has filed two appeals simultaneously challenging the same impugned order 29.04.2021, therefore the instant appeal being duplicate is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable/infructuous.

4.

In the result, the instant appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26.06.2024.

More judgments on Section 144C(5)

All 865 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →