AGRA-GWALIOR PATHWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED,MHOW vs. DCIT/ACIT/1(1), INDORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as it had become infructuous. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed a fresh order under Section 143(3) read with Section 263, accepting the assessee's submissions.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed against an order under Section 263 has become infructuous due to a subsequent order passed by the Assessing Officer accepting the assessee's submissions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर "ी परेश एम. जोशी, "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी अर"वंद सोनी, लेखा सद"य के सम" आ.अ.सं. 462/इंदौर/2025 "नधा"रण वष" : 2020-21 आ"ा-"वा"लयर पाथवेज बनाम उप/ सहायक आयकर "ा."ल"मटेड, आयु"त 1(1), इंदौर 76, माल रोड महू, इंदौर अपीलाथ" ""यथ" "था.ले.सं- एएएमसीए 6728 एल PAN- AAMCA6728L अपीलाथ" क" ओर से "ी मनोज फडनीस, सीए तथा "ी शुभम "यास, सीए राज"व क" ओर से "ी अनूप "संह, आयकर आयु"त-"वभागीय ""त"न"ध सुनवाई "त"थ 05.08.2026 उ"घोषणा "त"थ 05.08.2026 आदेश "ी परेश म.जोशी, "या"यक सद"य "वारा "नधा"रती क" उपरो"त शीष"क क" अपील "व"वान "धान आयकर आयु"त, इंदौर -1 के आयकर अ"ध"नयम, 1961 क" धारा 263 के अधीन आदेश "दनांक 24.03.2025 के "व""ध "नदे"शत है । 2. इस अपील के संबंध म" "नधा"रती के "व"वान अ"धव"ता ने "नवेदन "कया गया है "क "नधा"रती ने "धान आयकर आयु"त "वारा धारा 263 के अधीन पा"रत आदेश पर आप"" करते हुए इस "यायपीठ के सम" अपील दा"खल क" गई है । हालां"क "व"वान "धान आयकर आयु"त के उपयु"त आदेश के अनुपालन म" "व"वान आयकर उपायु"त-1, इंदौर "वारा आयकर अ"ध"नयम क" धारा 263 के साथ प"ठत धारा 143(3) के अधीन पा"रत आदेश "दनांक 24.03.2026 के "वारा
आ.अ.सं. 462/इंदौर/2025 2 आ"ा-"वा"लयर पाथवेज "ा."ल, महू, इंदौर "नधा"रण वष" 2020-21 के "लए "नधा"रण पूण" "कया गया है । "व"वान "नधा"रण अ"धकार" "वारा अपीलाथ" के "नव
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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 →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026