BHAVANABEN SAMATBHAI BORKHATARIYA,RAJKOT vs. PR. CIT, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 355/RJT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 September 2026AY 2020-212 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel submitted that the assessee did not wish to press the appeal. The Departmental Representative had no objection to this submission.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT challenging an order passed by the CIT (Appeals). The appeal was for the assessment year 2020-21.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee wished to proceed with the appeal before the tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. CIT (DR)
Hearing: 24/09/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal is preferred by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 20.03.2025, passed by the CIT (Appeals), Delhi, for the quantum of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. Before us, the Ld. Counsel, on behalf of the assessee submitted that assessee did not wish to press this appeal, to

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →