VIVEKANANDA LAL SONDHI,ABU DHABI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT TAX 3(1)(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITITA 287/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 September 2026AY 2024-252 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The reasoning was based on the assessee's submission that the appeal was filed before the incorrect forum (ITAT instead of CIT(Appeals)) due to a bonafide mistake. The Tribunal accepted this submission and allowed the withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn. The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the assessment order itself, as the appeal was withdrawn procedurally. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Vivekananda Lal Sondhi, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging an assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), Circle 3(1)(2), Delhi, under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessment year in question is 2024-25. The assessee's authorized representative (AR) submitted that the appeal against the said assessment order should have been filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and not the ITAT. The AR stated that the appeal was inadvertently filed before the ITAT on 05.06.2026 due to a bonafide mistake and requested permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed before the ITAT is maintainable against the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2024-25? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the appeal was filed before the ITAT inadvertently and that the correct forum for appeal against the assessment order in question is the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee relied on the fact that the filing before the ITAT was a bonafide mistake and sought permission to withdraw the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘D’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Khanna, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Shalini Verma, CIT DR
Hearing: 07.09.2026Pronounced: 07.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A No.287/DEL/2026 (Assessment Year: 2024-25) Vivekananda Lal Sondhi, vs. ACIT, Circle 18, Second Floor, Nizamuddin East, International Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi – 110 003. Delhi. (PAN : AKRPS6729F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Pankaj Khanna, CA REVENUE BY : Dr. Shalini Verma, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 07.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 07.09.2026 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. At the outset, ld. AR submitted that the assessee filed the present appeal against the assessment order framed by the ACIT, Circle 3 (1)(2) u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). He submitted that however, the appeal against the aforesaid assessment order lies before the ld. CIT (Appeals) and not before the ITAT. He submitted that the present appeal is inadvertently filed before the ITAT on 05.06.2026, which is a bonafide mistake. Accordingly, he pleaded that the assessee may be permitted to withdraw the present appeal.

2 IT(IT)A No.287/DEL/2026

2.

In view of the above, we permit withdrawal of the appeal. Hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn Order pronounced in the open court on this 7th day of September, 2026 after the conclusion of the hearing. sd/- sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 09.09.2026 TS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 144C(3)

All 595 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →