MANOHARS CATERING ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(3) , BANGALOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 663/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 June 2024AY 2008-09Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI WASEEM AHMED (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 CIT(A) dismissed the second appeal, holding that the matter had already been decided and there is no provision to file a fresh appeal against the same assessment order. The Tribunal agreed that the second appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-1. The assessee had previously filed an appeal against the assessment order which was dismissed by the CIT(A). Subsequently, the assessee filed a fresh appeal to the CIT(A) which was also dismissed as non-maintainable.

What were the issues?

Whether a second appeal filed against the same assessment order, after the first appeal was dismissed, is maintainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Shri Raghavendra Chakravarthy, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)
Hearing: 16.05.2024Pronounced: 04.06.2024

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the office of the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore dated 12/02/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1060795551(1) for the assessment year 2008-09.

2.

Before we take up the specific issue raised by the assessee in the ground of appeal, it is necessary to take a note of history of the case in brief, which is detailed as under:

S.No. Particulars Date 1 Assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) 24/12/2010 2 Appeal before the ld. CIT(A) 15/12/2011 3 Ld. CIT(A) order 30/01/2018 4 The above order was not challenged by the NA assessee 5 The assessee filed fresh appeal against the 31/05/2019 assessment order dated 24/12/2010 6 Ld. CIT(A) order against the fresh appeal 12/02/2024

3.

The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee dated 31/05/2019 vide order dated 12/02/2024 by holding that the appeal was already decided by his predecessor dated 30/01/2018 and there is no provision under the Act to file another appeal against the same assessment order. As such, the ld. CIT(A) held that the appeal filed by the assessee dated 31/05/2019 vide order dated 12/02/2024 is non- maintainable. The relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) in the order dated 12-02-2024 is reproduced as under:

“5. 2 The appellant has already filed an appeal against the assessment order under section 143(1) passed by the ACTT, Circle-1 (1) Bangalore on 24- 12-2010. The CIT (A) has decided/dismissed this appeal in on 30/01/2018. The appellant cannot file another appeal against the same order before another first appellate . authority. If the appellant thinks the order in 15/AY 2008-09 on 30/01/2018 is not correct the appellant has to file an appeal before the ITAT. The CIT(A) cannot recall its order and can take a fresh decision only if the ITAT sets it aside to the CIT(A) for reconsideration. There is no prima-facie mistake in the order that can be rectified u/s154. 5.3 The second set of appeals filed against the assessment order before the first appellate authority is infructuous and not maintainable. In the result, the appeal is treated as Dismissed in limine.”

4.

The assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 12/02/2024 has preferred an appeal before us.

5.

It was contended by the ld. AR that the fresh/ second appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) as per the advice of ld. CIT(A) vide dated 18/06/2018. However, on question posted by the Bench, whether the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) in the second appeal as discussed above is maintainable under the provisions of law, the ld. AR fairly conceded that such order is not maintainable and, therefore, the appeal does not lie before the Tribunal.

6.

Admittedly, the first appellate order dated 30/01/2018 was not challenged by the assessee under the bona-fide belief that the assessee has filed another appeal. If assessee wishes to challenge such order dated 30/01/2018, he can do so, as per the provisions of law. The ld. DR also submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee against the second appellate order is not maintainable. In view of the above and after considering the facts in totality, we hold that the appeal filed by the assessee before us against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 12/02/2024 is non-est and not maintainable. Accordingly, we dismiss the same as infructuous.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →