M/S. AMIT ENTERPRISES HOUSING LIMITED,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL), 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 Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals, considering there were no adverse implications from the PCIT's order and to avoid litigation costs.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against an order passed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed a revised assessment order after verification, making no additions.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals filed against the PCIT's order under Section 263 should be allowed to be withdrawn by the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee directed against the separate orders of ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune common dated 31.03.2021 for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18. 2. When the matter had come up for hearing, ld. AR for the assessee filed a letter dated 24.05.2022 seeking permission to withdraw the above captioned appeals. The relevant contents of the said letter dated 24.05.2022 are reproduced hereunder :- “In this regard it is respectfully submitted that the Appellant had filed the appeal before Your Honours against the order of the Hon'ble Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax ('PCIT') passed u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') dated 31st March, 2021, wherein the Hon'ble PCIT has set aside the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A dated 27th December, 2018 for the year under consideration, with specific directions to verify the year on year revenue recognition and estimated cost of construction. Subsequently, the Learned Assessing Officer ('Ld. AO') has passed the assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act wherein after verification of issues as required by the Hon'ble PCIT, no addition has been made by the Ld. AO. In view of the fact that there are no adverse implications of the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act and to avoid cost of litigation, the Appellant requests your Honour to kindly allow the Appellant to withdraw the appeal mentioned above, for the kind act of which the Appellant shall be much obliged.”
Considering the above submissions of the ld. AR for the assessee and ld. Sr. DR’s no objection for withdrawal of these appeals, we hereby grant permission to the assessee to withdraw these appeals. Accordingly, the above captioned appeals stands dismissed as ‘withdrawn’.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed as ‘withdrawn’. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 26th day of May, 2022. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated : 26th May, 2022. Sujeet आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant.
""यथ" / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT (Central), Pune. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब"च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड" फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
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 →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026