SHRI RAMAVTAR MAHIPAL HUF,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, SRIGANGANAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 164/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 August 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the revenue had no objection. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was for the assessment year 2013-14. During the hearing, the assessee's authorized representative applied to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT's order under Section 263 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, and whether the PCIT had recorded its own satisfaction. The primary issue became the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF

Hearing: 14/07/2023

This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner dated 15.03.2018 [here in after (PCIT)] for assessment year 2013-14.

Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:-

“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Id Pr. CIT. Bikaner u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961 is bad in law, bad in facts and perverse. 2 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld Pr. CIT. Bikaner erred in not recording own satisfaction in respect of assessment order passed by the id AO is erroneous so as it prejudicial the interest of revenue as per provision of section 263 of the Act. 3] That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id Pr. CIT. Bikaner grossly erred in setting aside the assessment order passed by the u/s 143(3) without any finding as to how the assessment order passed by the Id AO is erroneous so as it prejudicial the interest of revenue. 4] That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld Pr. CIT, Bikaner erred in recording various finding in the order are contrary to the material available on record.

5.

That the petitioner may kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing. 6] The petitioner prays for justice & relief.”

3.

At the time of hearing of this appeal the ld. AR applied before the bench vide his application dated 26.05.2023 prayed for withdrawal of the appeal for which ld. DR has no objection. Hence, the Bench allows the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF Order pronounced under rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →