POONAM RAJKUMAR DIWANKA,NAGPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 228/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 June 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee, finding that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted by the CIT(A) in a prior appeal, requested to withdraw the current appeal as it had become infructuous. There was a significant delay of 340 days in filing this appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 29/02/2024, passed by the learned CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19. The original assessment order was passed under section 143(3) r/w section 153C. A subsequent order under section 263 of the Act directed a fresh assessment. The CIT(A), in appeal against the consequential order, deleted an addition of ₹ 64,42,400.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is infructuous and can be dismissed as withdrawn due to a prior favorable order and delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153C,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Agrawal
For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar

Date of Hearing – 23/06/2025 Date of Order – 23/06/2025

O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.

By this appeal, the assessee has challenged the impugned order dated 29/02/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2018–19.

2.

During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (for short "the A.R.") has submitted that initially the order under section 143(3) r/w section 153C of the Income Tax Act,

2 Poonam Rajkumar Diwanka ITA no.228/Nag./2025 1961 (for short "the Act") was passed by the Assessing Officer on 24/09/2021, which was subject matter in the proceedings under section 263 of the Act which culminated into passing the order dated 29/02/2024, under section 263 of the Act, whereby the aforesaid assessment order was set aside for framing fresh assessment. In consequence to the aforesaid order passed under section 263 of the Act, the Assessing Officer, passed order on 24/02/2025, against which the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A), who, vide order dated 30/05/2025, deleted the addition of ` 64,42,400, on account of long term capital gain, as made by the Assessing Officer vide consequential order in conformity with the order passed under section 263 of the Act as the assessee can no longer be said to be aggrieved. Thus, the instant appeal challenging the order under section 263 of the Act has become infructuous. There is a delay of 340 days in filing the instant appeal. The assessee, in the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances has requested for withdrawal of this appeal and did not press for adjournment. The learned Departmental Representative did not refute the factual aspect of the case. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in totality, as requested, the instant appeal by the assessee is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.

3 Poonam Rajkumar Diwanka ITA no.228/Nag./2025

3.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →