VENKAT MANIKRAO SHINDE,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2343/PUN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 January 2019AY 2008-094 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel filed a letter seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The Tribunal, having no objection from the revenue, allowed the withdrawal request.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order under section 271(1)(c). The penalty was imposed for not providing confirmations from creditors and details of unpaid expenses for the assessment year 2008-09.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal due to the unavailability of supporting documents and strained relations with concerned parties.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das

PER R.S.SYAL, VP :

This appeal filed by the assessee arises out of the order of CIT(A)-9, Pune confirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. Before us, there was no appearance from the side of the assessee. However, we find ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a letter dated 12-01-2019 seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The relevant contents of such withdrawal letter, read as under :

2 Shri Venkat Shinde

“On behalf of our client Shri Venkat Shinde, we would like to state before your good office the following facts : We are in receipt of your notice to attend before your good self in subject matter for the Assessment Year 2008-09 on 24/01/2019. We request withdrawal of appeal No.2343/PUN/2016. Brief description of appellate order in that the appeal is against the penalty order passed by the ACIT, Range 8 “Where the penalty is imposed on not providing the confirmations from the creditors and unpaid expenses. As the case relates to Assessment Year 2008-09 many of the documents are not in place. Also we are not in the talking terms with the concerned parties. In view of the facts mentioned herein we wish to withdraw the appeal.”

3.

On perusal of the above letter and having no objection from the side of ld. DR, we allow the request of the assessee to withdraw

the appeal.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as ‘withdrawn’.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24th January, 2019. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

पुणे Pune; "दनांक Dated : 24th January, 2019 सतीश

3 Shri Venkat Shinde

आदेश क" क" क" "ितिलिप क" "ितिलिप "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अ"ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant;

2.

""यथ" / The Respondent;

3.

The CIT(A)-9, Pune

4.

The Pr.CIT-5, Pune िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय 5. अिधकरण, पुणे “बी” / DR ‘B’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. //// आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

4 Shri Venkat Shinde

Date

1.

Draft dictated on 24-01-2019 Sr.PS

2.

Draft placed before author 24-01-2019 Sr.PS

3.

Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member

4.

Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member.

5.

Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS

6.

Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS

7.

Date of uploading order Sr.PS

8.

File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS

9.

Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk

10.

Date on which file goes to the A.R.

11.

Date of dispatch of Order.

*

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →