RASHMI AGARWAL,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), INDORE, INDORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the subsequent order passed by the Assessing Officer rendered the appeal 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 an order under Section 143(3) read with Section 263, accepting the assessee's declared income and not drawing any adverse inferences.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed against a Section 263 order becomes infructuous if a subsequent order under Section 143(3) accepts the assessee's declared income.
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. 468/इंदौर/2025 "नधा"रण वष" : 2015-16 रि"म अ"वाल, बनाम आयकर अ"धकार" बीजी 145, "क"म 74सी, वाड" 1(4), इंदौर "वजय नगर, इंदौर अपीलाथ" ""यथ" "था.ले.सं- एईएनपीए 3533 पी PAN- AENPA3533P अपीलाथ" क" ओर से "ी हष" चौकसे, 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 27.03.2025 के "व""ध "नदे"शत है । 2. इस अपील के संबंध म" "नधा"रती के "व"वान अ"धव"ता ने "नधा"रती के "ल"खत आवेदन के मा"यम से "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 "नधा"रण अ"धकार" "वारा अ"ध"नयम क" धारा 263 के साथ प"ठत धारा 143(3) के अधीन "नधा"रण पूण" "कया गया तथा "नधा"रण आदेश "दनांक 16.03.2026 म" "नधा"रती "वारा "ववरणी म" घो"षत आय
आ.अ.सं. 468/इंदौर/2025 2 रि"म अ"वाल, इंदौर "वीकार क" गई तथा कोई ""तकूल "न"कष" नह"ं "नकाला गया । "नधा"रती "वा
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 →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026