RAMAIAH CHEEKATI,KADAPA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, GUNTUR
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 noted that the Departmental Representative did not object to the withdrawal request. Consequently, the Tribunal accepted the request and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2019-20, which arose from an Assessing Officer's order under Section 144 read with Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. At the threshold of the hearing, the assessee filed a petition to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should permit the assessee to withdraw their appeal when both parties agree to the withdrawal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench
सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of : 08.07.2025 Conclusion of Hearing घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 10.07.2025 O R D E R प्रनत रवीश सूद, जे.एम./PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M.
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam – 3, dated 29.03.2025, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short “A.O.”) u/s 144 r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) dated 31.03.2022 for A.Y. 2019-20.
Shri Santi Pavan Kumar, Advocate, the learned Authorized Representative (for short “Ld.AR”) for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, filed a petition duly signed by the assessee requesting the Tribunal to allow the withdrawal of the appeal filed by the assessee.
Per contra, Dr. Aparna Villuri, Senior Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”) has not objected to the request of the assessee seeking permission to withdraw the appeal.
We have heard the learned Authorized Representatives of both parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record.
At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee does not wish to pursue the present appeal and, accordingly, has filed an application seeking withdrawal of the same. The learned Departmental Representative raised no objection to the request of the assessee. In view of the above, the request for withdrawal of the appeal is accepted. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10th July, 2025.
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
