MALLAMPALLI NAGA SIREESHA,TANUKU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TANUKU
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn, granting liberty to seek recall of the order if unforeseen circumstances arise.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. The assessee later availed the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme and received Form No. 3 from the Income Tax Department.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee availing the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HONBLE
Per N.K. Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28/03/2018 impugned herein passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry u/sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for the A.Y. 2012-13.
At the time of hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that since assessee has availed the immunity scheme i.e. Vivad Se Vishwas under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and the Income Tax Department has issued Form No.3,
(Smt.Mallampalli Naga Sireesha) dated 23/12/2020 in response to the application filed by the assessee under the scheme, therefore appeal of the assessee may be allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek recall of the order in case any unforeseen circumstances would arise in future.
The Ld. DR raised no objection, if the appeal of the assessee is allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn.
Having heard both the parties and perused the application for withdrawal of the appeal and Form No.3 (Copy already on record) issued by the Department. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of assessee is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek recall of the order as prayed for in accordance with law, hence ordered accordingly.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 11th day of March, 2021.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026