What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the request made by the assessee's authorized representative. The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) upholding certain disallowances and interest charges. The assessee's authorized representative requested to withdraw the appeal during the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal, which was granted by the tribunal.

Ramesh Kumar Damani vs Circle 32(1) | ITAT Mumbai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, SR AR

Hearing: 14.05.2026Pronounced: 20.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6659/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Ramesh Kumar Damani Circle 32(1), Mumbai 403, 30D, Usha Kunj, Juhi Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Tara Road, Juhu, Koliwada, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai -400049 Vs. Mumbai - 400051 PAN/GIR No. AFTPD2293L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assesseeby Shri Mukul Moondra (Virtually Present) Revenue by Shri Annavaram Kosuri, SR AR Date of Hearing 14.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement 20.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/CIT(A) for the assessment year. The following grounds are reproduced below: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance of tax credit of 1 Rs. 40,23,539.00 despite the credit being duly corroborated by Form 16, correctly claimed in the return of income, and fully reflected in the assessee's Form 26AS 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the disallowance of 2 exemptions/

2 ITA No.6659 /Mum/2025 deductions aggregating to Rs. 7,38,980, without considering that all requisite supporting documents, and bank statement, were duly furnished and placed on record.

Ground The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the disallowance of the donation of Rs. 100000.00 to Manvadhikar National Party (MNP) without considering that all requisite supporting documents, and bank statement, were duly furnished and placed on record.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law by not providing reasonable opportunity of hearing during the appeal proceedings 5.Excessive Interest U/s 234A, 234B and 234C should be deleted

Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee stated at the Bar that she wished to withdraw the appeal. Considering the request made by the Ld. AR, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn.

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 20/05/2026 RY-Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 1.

3 ITA No.6659 /Mum/2025 प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy//

उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai

RAMESH KUMAR DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 32(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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