Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order related to proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2012-13. The case was called twice, and no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, hence it was proceeded ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the present appeal was found to be a duplicate file. The matter had already been restored to the CIT(A) by a previous order of a co-ordinate bench for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as a duplicate file.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is to be dismissed as a duplicate file when the matter has already been decided or restored by a co-ordinate bench.
Sections Cited
271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Damy Royal Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, C/o DS Legal & Associates, Circle-7(1), B-50, LGF, South Extension-II, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCD5915G Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 13.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 20.11.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1062545788(1) dated 13.03.2024, in proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It is next noticed with the above assistance coming from the Revenue side that the assessee’s instant appeal is found to be a “duplicate” file since the earlier learned co-ordinate bench Damy Royal Industries (P) Ltd. order in dated 30.04.2025 has already restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law. Rejected accordingly.