What did the Tribunal hold?

During the hearing, the assessee's counsel stated that the assessee did not wish to press the appeal and requested its dismissal. The Departmental Representative raised no objection.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal can be dismissed as withdrawn by the assessee.

Mkc Infrastructure Ltd, Anjar vs PCIT | s.143(3) | ITAT Rajkot 2026

Q: What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 was against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which upheld an assessment order under Section 143(3).

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA

Hearing: 18.02.2026

आदेश/ ORDER Per Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM:

Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) – 2020-21, is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [(in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 27.03.2025, which in turn assessment order passed by Income Tax Department/ Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 27.09.2022.

MKC Infrastructure Ltd. 2. During the course of hearing, Shri Darshit Ranpara, Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted that the assessee does not want to press the appeal and the same may be dismissed.

That the Learned Senior Departmental Representative (DR) did not raise any objection.

Keeping in view of the aforesaid circumstances. We permit the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 12/03/2026.

MKC INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,ANJAR vs. PR. CIT, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments