MUTHYAM SUMAN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1566/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 April 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) has the power to dismiss an appeal as withdrawn, as this action amounts to confirming the assessment order under Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the assessee's contention was rejected.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as withdrawn. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT, arguing that the CIT(A) lacked the power to dismiss an appeal upon withdrawal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) has the power to dismiss an appeal filed by the assessee upon the assessee's request for withdrawal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 251(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A, HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri G. Kalyan Das
For Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Hearing: 28/03/2019Pronounced: 05/04/2019

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A) – 5, Hyderabad, dated, 30/05/2018 for AY 2010-11.

Brief facts of the case are, the assessee filed her return 2. of income for AY 2010-11 admitting total income of Rs. 1,55,250/-. As per CIB Data, the assessee sold property for a consideration of Rs. 30 lakhs whereas the SRO value was at Rs. 42,44,800/-. Hence, a notice u/s 148 was issued and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) rws 147 on 16/10/2017 by assessing the total income at Rs. 35,87,640/-.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, later, the assessee filed a letter dated 23/05/2018 before the CIT(A) withdrawing her

2 I.T.A. No. 1566/Hyd/18 Muthyam Suman, Hyd.

appeal. Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn.

4.

Against the said order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us contending that the CIT(A) has no power to allow the assessee to withdraw her appeal, though the assessee has specifically submitted a letter to withdraw her appeal on the advice of auditors.

5.

Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that on the advice of senior counsels, the assessee filed this appeal before the ITAT to revive the appeal and adjudicate the same on merits.

6.

Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of CIT(A).

7.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We noticed that assessee filed a letter requesting to withdraw the appeal filed before ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. Now assessee is in appeal before us with the plea that ld. CIT(A) has no power to dismiss the appeal due to withdrawal as he do not have power within the meaning of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. As pe section 251(1)(a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. Since the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, he confirms the assessment passed by the AO. Therefore, in our view, CIT(A) has applied his right within the meaning of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. Hence, the contention of the assessee is rejected and the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.

3 I.T.A. No. 1566/Hyd/18 Muthyam Suman, Hyd.

7.1 However, in our view, assessee has withdrawn the appeal due to age and health factor as per the letter submitted before the CIT(A). The remedy for this is available only with CIT(A) office. Assessee may go back to CIT(A) and request for retrieval of the appeal or file a fresh appeal with condonation. Assessee has to pursue the case at CIT(A) level.

8.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on 5th April, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 5th April, 2019. kv Copy forwarded to: 1. Smt. Muthyam Suman, C/o M/s Kalyandas & Co., Cas., 15, Venkateshwara Colony, Naayanagunda, Hyderabad – 29. 2. ITO, Ward – 5(2), Hyderabad. 3. CIT(A) - 5, Hyderabad 4. Pr. CIT – 4, Hyderabad 5. The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6. Guard File

More judgments on Section 251(1)(a)

All 935 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251(1)(a) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →