RAMA NARASIMHA PHANI KIRAN CHELLINGI,RAZOLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMALAPURAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 393/VIZ/2025Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 September 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Vice President), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the main appeal for the assessment year was still pending before the CIT(A), and the assessee wished to withdraw the current appeal seeking an absolute stay. As the Departmental Representative did not object, the Tribunal accepted the withdrawal request.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied to the CIT(A) for a stay of demand, which was granted conditionally. Subsequently, the assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT seeking an absolute stay of demand. During the hearing, the assessee's representative sought to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT should allow the withdrawal of an appeal seeking an absolute stay of demand when the substantive appeal is pending before the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH AT HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

Hearing: 10/09/2025

आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M. : This appeal is filed by Shri Rama Narasimha Phani Kiran Chellingi (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam-1 (“Ld. PCIT”), dated 29.05.2025 for the A.Y. 2022-23.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

1.

1. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had applied for stay of demand before the Ld. CIT(A), who had granted a conditional stay. Thereafter, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal seeking an absolute stay of demand. During the course of hearing, the Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) filed an application for withdrawal of this appeal and submitted that since the appeal for the relevant assessment year is still pending before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee does not wish to press this appeal before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the Ld. DR requested for withdrawal of the present appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld.

DR”) did not raise any objection to the request of the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions and gone through the material available on record. Since the assessee has himself requested for withdrawal of the appeal and the Ld. DR has not objected, we see no reason to keep the matter pending. Accordingly, the request of the assessee is accepted, and the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

6.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →