DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1),KOCHI vs. M/S GEOJIT FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 363/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 September 2024Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memberand Shri Soundararajan K. (Judicial Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the appeal filed by the Revenue was indeed a duplicate. Therefore, it was held to be not maintainable and dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the appeal was a duplicate of a previously filed appeal for the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to it being a duplicate filing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Waseem Ahmedand Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
For Respondent: Shri Radhesh Bhatt, CA
Hearing: 23.09.2024Pronounced: 26.09.2024

Appellant by: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R. Respondent by: Shri Radhesh Bhatt, CA Date of Hearing: 23.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 26.09.2024 O R D E R Per Bench This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 15.03.2023 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned appeal filed by the Revenue is the duplicate appeal. According to the learned counsel for the assessee, the Revenue has already preferred an appeal for the same assessment year in which was heard on 21-08-2024 and reserved for order. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the assessee contended that the impugned appeal preferred by Revenue is not maintainable and therefore liable to be dismissed as infructuous.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the fact that the impugned appeal filed by the Revenue on hand is the duplicate appeal, we hold that the impugned appeal is not maintainable and therefore we dismiss the same as infructuous.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →