RASUN EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 240/HYD/2020Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 October 2021AY 2014-154 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be considered an aggrieved party once its appeal was withdrawn and dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee was advised to pursue other legal remedies if they wished to challenge the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an assessment order. During the appeal proceedings, the assessee sought permission to withdraw its appeal. The CIT(A) granted the permission and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessee who withdraws its appeal before the CIT(A) can be considered an aggrieved party. The procedural aspect of withdrawing an appeal and its implications.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI S.S.GODARA

O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2014-15 arises against the CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad’s order dated 02-08-2018, in case No.0464 / DCIT-3(1) / CIT(A)-3 / 2016-17, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]; respectively. Case called twice. None appeared for the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It transpires at the outset that this assessee’s instant appeal suffers from 10 days delay stated to be attributable to the reason(s) beyond its control as per condonation petition/affidavit. No rebuttal has come from the departmental side. The impugned delay is condoned therefore.

We note with the able assistance coming from the Revenue’s side that the CIT(A) has permitted the assessee to withdraw its corresponding lower appeal as under: “Appeal in this case was filed against the intimation dated 22.09.2016 processed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2014-15 by the DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. During the appeal proceedings, Sh.M.Lakshmi Narayana Rao, and Sh.Ravi Kumar, Ars appeared and the case was heard.

VI) Ground No.2 in appeal is general in nature and does not call for adjudication.

VII) Ground No.1 in appeal relates to additions of Rs.22 lakhs and Rs.55 lakhs. Facts of the case, grounds of appeal, assessment order and submissions of the appellant were perused. During the course of appeal proceedings, the Managing Director of the appellant company filed a petition seeking permission for withdrawal of appeal. The appellant on reconciliation of the facts and cir5cumstances of the case sought permission for withdrawal of the case. Considering the request of the appellant, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal. Hence, the appeal is treated as infructuous and dismissed as withdrawn. VIII) In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn”.

4. It is therefore clear that the assessee cannot be held to be an aggrieved party once the CIT(A) has accepted its application seeking withdrawal of the first appeal. Be that as it may, we make it clear that it shall be open for the assessee to take recourse to appropriate remedy as per law for seeking to recall the CIT(A)’s order under challenge; if so advised.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in foregoing terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th October, 2021

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →