ASSTT. COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), MUMBAI V. CRANES REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

MA 106/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue and the assessee, Cranes Real Estate Private Limited, arising from the orders of the ITAT, Mumbai, concerning the same appellate order from the CIT(A) dated 13.12.2022 for the assessment year 2012-13. The Revenue's application was delayed and pertained to ITA No. 945/Mum/2024, while the assessee's application, also delayed, related to ITA No. 958/Mum/2024, which had been dismissed for non-prosecution. The Tribunal found the duplication of appeals based on the same CIT(A) order unsustainable and allowed the applications accordingly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791928 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: TISHA BAGH; KAVITA P. KAUSHIK
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. 106/Mum/2025 (Arising out of I.T.A No.945/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 vs Cranes Real Estate Private Limited Unit No. 34A, 2nd Floor, Arsieala Building, Wode House Road, Colaba, Mumbai-400 005 PAN : AADCC1763G APPLICANT RESPONDENT M.A. 268/Mum/2025 (Arising out of I.T.A No.958/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Cranes Real Estate Private Limited Unit No.34A, 2nd Floor, Arsieala Building, Wode House Road, Colaba, Mumbai-400 005 PAN : AADCC1763G vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 APPLICANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Tisha Bagh Respondent by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (SR DR) Date of hearing : 07/11/2025 Date of pronouncement : 08/12/2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 MAs No.106 & 268/Mum/2025 Cranes Real Estate Pvt Ltd O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM): Both miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue and the assessee arise out of the orders of the ITAT, Mumbai, in ITA Nos. 945/Mum/2024 and 958/Mum/2024, dated 11.06.2024 and 07.06.2024 respectively, for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The Ld. DR submitted that the miscellaneous application (MA) filed by the revenue is delayed by 113 days. The Ld. DR stated that a petition for condonation of delay has been filed, and the revenue received the Tribunal’s order on 14.11.2024. Accordingly, the MA was required to be filed within six months from the date of receipt of the order, i.e., on or before 12.05.2025. The revenue, however, filed the miscellaneous application on 23.04.2024. The Ld. DR further pointed out that, arising from the same order of the Ld. CIT(A), the ITAT has passed two separate orders. The revenue’s MA relates to ITA No. 945/Mum/2024, order dated 11.06.2024. 3. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s MA is filed with a delay of 81 days. The assessee’s MA pertains to ITA No. 958/Mum/2024, which was dismissed by the Bench for non-prosecution. The Ld. AR contended that reasonable opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the assessee. He explained that ITA No. 945/Mum/2024 was filed online on 29.02.2024, while ITA No. 958/Mum/2024 was filed physically on 01.03.2024, resulting in duplication of appeals against the same CIT(A) order. The Ld. AR therefore prayed for recall of the order and restoration of the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that both appeals before the Tribunal for A.Y. 2012-13 arise from the same appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13.12.2022. Consequently, Printed from counselvise.com 3 MAs No.106 & 268/Mum/2025 Cranes Real Estate Pvt Ltd duplication of appeals based on the same CIT(A) order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, MA No. 106/Mum/2025 is allowed, and the corresponding appeal in ITA No. 945/Mum/2024 is dismissed as a duplicate. On the other hand, MA No. 268/Mum/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed, and the Tribunal’s order in ITA No. 958/Mum/2024 dated 07.06.2024 is recalled for fresh adjudication. The registry is directed to fix ITA No. 958/Mum/2024 for hearing in due course. 5. In the result, the M.A. No.106/Mum/2025 & MA No. 268/Mum/2025 are allowed and ITA No. 945/Mum/2024 is dismissed for duplication. Order pronounced in the open court on 08/12/ 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 08 /12/2025 Pavanan Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ /The Appellant , 2. ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु\u0014 CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 5. गाड\u0019फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI Printed from counselvise.com "