ACIT, COIMBATORE vs. MAGNA ELECTRO CASTINGS LIMITED, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1632/CHNY/2013Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 October 2015AY 2007-083 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 present appeal was a duplication of a previously filed appeal. As the previous appeal was already adjudicated, there was nothing left for adjudication in the current appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(Appeals). There was a delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned. The Revenue later realized that it had filed an appeal against the same order in a previous case.

What were the issues?

Whether a subsequent appeal filed by the Revenue against the same order, which was already adjudicated in a previous appeal, is maintainable.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

Hearing: 01.10.2015Pronounced: 09.10.2015

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore, dated 07.05.2013 and pertains to assessment year 2007-08.

2.

There was a delay of six days in filing this appeal by the Revenue. The Revenue has filed a petition for condonation of delay. We have gone through the petition and we find that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal before the stipulated time. Therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing, Sh. P.

Radhakrishnan, the Ld. D.R., pointed out that the Revenue has filed an appeal against the very same order of the CIT(Appeals) in I.T.A.

No.1797/Mds/2013. This Tribunal, by an order dated 11.02.2015, disposed of the appeal. The present appeal of the Revenue in is a duplication. Therefore, this appeal of the Revenue may not survive for adjudication.

4.

None appeared for the assessee, inspite of issue of notice.

However, the Ld. representative for the assessee has written a letter, which is placed on record, saying that the Revenue has filed appeal against very same order of the CIT(Appeals), in I.T.A.

No.1797/Mds/2013, which was dismissed by this Tribunal by order dated 11.02.2015. Therefore, the present appeal of the Revenue against very same order of the CIT(Appeals) need not be adjudicated.

5.

We have carefully gone through the orders of the lower authorities and also the appeal folder in I.T.A. No.1797/Mds/2013. In fact, the Revenue had filed the appeal against the very same impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) in I.T.A. No.1797/Mds/2013. This Tribunal, by order dated 11.02.2015, rejected the claim of the Revenue. Therefore, it is obvious that the present appeal filed by the Revenue in is duplication. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in this appeal.

6.

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

Order pronounced on 9th October, 2015 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →