What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel requested to withdraw the appeal. The Department had no objection to the withdrawal. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The assessee company, Vayam Technologies Limited, is undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Resolution Professional has authorized a Chartered Accountant to represent the company before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to ongoing insolvency proceedings.

Vayam Technologies Limited, New… vs DCIT | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH‘C’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Katyal, CA

For Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma

Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 04.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.962/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14)

Vayam Technologies Limited, DCIT, Thapar House, Circle-25(1), 124 Janpath, v. New Delhi. New Delhi-110001. PAN-AAACI8050R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri P.K. Katyal, CA Department by Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 04.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement 04.08.2026

ORDER PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal in ITA No. 962/Del/2024 for Assessment Year: 2013-14 filed by the assessee has arisen form the learned CIT(A)’s appellate order u/s 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961(in Short “Act”) dated 06.01.2024 (DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059440661(1)), which appeal before ld. CIT(A) in turn has arisen from the assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee Sh. Praveen K. Katyal, CA submitted that the assessee want to withdraw its appeal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the company is under Hon’ble NCLT wherein Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) proceedings are underway u/s 7 of the

2ITA No.962/Del/2024 Vayam Technologies Limited vs. DCIT

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 , and Shri Mukesh Kumar Grover (Reg No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-00383/2017-18/10640) is appointed as Resolution Professional by Hon’ble NCLT. CA Shri Praveen K. Katyal(M.No. 082539) produced authority letter dated 03.08.2026 issued by aforesaid Resolution Professional in his favour to represent Corporate Debtor i.e. the assessee case before ITAT, which is reproduced as under:

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee , CA Shri Praveen K Katyal made statement before the Bench that the assessee wants to withdraw its appeal in ITA no. 962/Del/2024 for assessment year 2013-14 before ITAT, and prayed that the

3ITA No.962/Del/2024 Vayam Technologies Limited vs. DCIT

aforesaid appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also produced letter dated 03.08.2026 requesting for withdrawal of the appeal , and he stated that the said request letter is signed by Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor i.e. the assessee , which is reproduced hereunder:

4ITA No.962/Del/2024 Vayam Technologies Limited vs. DCIT

3.2 The ld. CIT-DR has no objection, if the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. After hearing rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 962/Del/2024 for assessment year 2013-14 as being withdrawn. We order accordingly. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 04.08.2026 on the conclusion of the hearing in the presence of both the parties.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 05.08.2026 *PK, Sr. Ps* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

VAYAM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 25(1), NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments