KALIDAS KHANNA,NOIDA vs. PR,CIT DELHI 10, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 707/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 September 2022AY 2016-172 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as the revised order passed by the Assessing Officer was no longer a cause of grievance. The Revenue did not object to the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an order passed by the Pr. CIT under section 263, which had set aside the Assessing Officer's order and directed a fresh computation of long-term capital gains. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed a revised order after considering a DVO's report, which did not cause further grievance to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal against the Pr. CIT's order has become infructuous due to a subsequent revised order by the AO. The validity of the Pr. CIT's order under section 263 was also a point of contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 50C,Section 142A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Shri Anuj Gupta, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12/09/2022Pronounced: 12/09/2022

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, J. M.: 1. This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the ld Pr. CIT, Delhi-10 dated 20.03.2021 for Assessment Year 2016-17.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the Assessee, however, the Assessee submitted a letter 08.09.2022, wherein, the Assessee requested that this appeal may be allowed to be withdrawn for the reason that the Assessee Ld. PCIT-10 New Delhi passed an order u/s 263 of the Act for AY 2016-17 setting aside the order of the Assessing officer dated 29/12/2018 u/s 143(3) of the Act assessing the income of the appellant at Rs 1,72,41,808/- against the retuned income of Rs 10,22,840/-. The Ld. PCIT- 10 in his order under section 263, directed the AO to compute the long term capital gains u/s 50C afresh correctly applying the provisions of section 50C of the Act on the proportionate share of property disposed off by the appellant during the FY 2015-16. The appellant challenged the order passed by the Ld. PCIT-10 on the grounds of jurisdiction before the tribunal. During the proceedings u/s 143(2) read with section 263, the AO refereed the property under assessment for valuation to the Departmental Valuation Officer [DVO] under section 142A of the Act. The DVO issued his report in 31.03.2022. After considering the report of the valuation officer, the Assessing officer has not made any further additions to the earlier assessed income in his order passed u/s 143(3)/263. Thus the order passed u/s 143(3)/263 dated 10.08.2022 is not causing any grievance to the Assessee, the appeal filed before the tribunal against the order of Ld. PCIT-10 becomes infructuous.

3.

The Ld. DR does not have any objection for the said request of the ld AR.

4.

Heard and perused the letter dated 08.09.2022. We have gone through the request submitted by the Assessee and since the ld DR does not have any objection, the appeal is allowed to be withdrawn.

5.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →