MALPANI VENEERS PVT LTD,GANDHIDHAM vs. PCIT-1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not wish to prosecute the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. During the hearing, the assessee's representative stated that the assessee no longer wished to pursue the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee wished to withdraw its appeal before the tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot
Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot
Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 229/RJT/2025 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2017-18 ] Malpani Veneers Pvt Ltd PCIT-1 Rajkot A-62 Apnanagar Gandhidham kutch Income tax office. Rajkot-360001, Vs. Gandhidham 370201, Kutch, Gujarat Gujarat �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCM3419L (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ram Tiwari, Ld. CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 29/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 03/08/2026
:: ORDER :: Per, Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: The instant appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 29.03.2024.
At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee does not wish to press the present appeal and sought permission to withdraw the same. The Ld. DR did not raise any objection to the said request.
ITA No. 229/RJT/2025 Malpani Veneors P. Ltd. 03. We, after hearing the rival parties and considering the submission made by the Ld. AR, we find that the assessee does not wish to prosecute the present appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 3rd day of August, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. BRR Kumar] [ Shri Sonjoy Sarma ] Vice President Judicial Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 03/08/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot
Page 2 of 2
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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ritika Ispat PVT. Limited, Balanda, Sundargarh vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S.Ritika Ispat PVT. LTD.,Balanda, Sundergarh vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Biswanath Pradhan vs. The Principal Commnr., CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S.Ritika Ispat PVT. LTD.,Balanda, Sundergarh vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Shree Sai Jagannath, Rourkela, Sundargarh vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026