RUMY RAVI KUMAR,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT -27, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 119/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as there was no objection from the revenue. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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. The assessee later wished to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the assessee's appeal should be withdrawn. The assessee sought withdrawal because no additions or disallowances were made by the AO/NFAC while giving effect to the PCIT's order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM

Hearing: 24/05/2022Pronounced: 31/05/2022

O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-27 dated 26.03.2021 for the assessment year 2014-15 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”).

2.

None appeared for the assessee, however we note that there has been a letter of Shri Dinesh Joothawat AR of the assessee dated 23rd May, 2022 placed before us which convey that the assessee wishes to withdraw the appeal since the AO/NFAC, Delhi while giving effect to the Ld. PCIT’s impugned order dated 26.03.2021 has not made any addition/disallowances. Therefore, assessee wishes to withdraw the 2 A.Y. 2014-15 Rumy Ravi Kumar appeal. Since there is no objection from the part of the revenue, we allow the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →