M/S. DREAM PLAST INDIA PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -5, PUNE
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as the underlying issue was resolved. The Tribunal granted permission for withdrawal.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Transfer Pricing Officer completed proceedings without making any adjustments to the assessee's total income.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal is maintainable after the underlying issue has been resolved by the Transfer Pricing Officer.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH, ‘B’ PUNE
Before: SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM :
This appeal is against Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Pune’s order dated 11.07.2018 for assessment year 2015-16.
When the matter had come up for hearing, the appellant company filed a letter dated 25.03.2022 seeking permission to withdraw the above captioned appeal. The relevant contents of the said letter dated 25.03.2022 are reproduced hereunder :- “This is with reference to the captioned appeal filed by Dream Plast with the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘Hon’ble ITAT’) in respect of AY 2015-16 on 14 September 2018 (enclosed as Annexure 1). The Appellant had filed the captioned appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT against the order passed by Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-5 under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) directing to complete the assessment afresh after referring the case to learned Transfer Pricing Office (‘Ld. TPO’). In this regard, the Appellant would like to mention that the proceedings before the Ld. TPO for AY 2015-16 have been completed (enclosed is the order u/s 92CA of the Act as Annexure 2). Since the order has been disposed off by the Ld. TPO without making any adjustment to the total income of the Appellant, the Appellant no longer wishes to prefer an appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT which is listed for hearing on 11 April 2022 (enclosed is the notice of hearing as Annexure 3). In view of the above, we request your goodself to take the above on record and accede to our request. We shall be pleased to provide you with any further information/ clarification that you may require in this regard.”
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026