DECENT SECURITIES P LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 7(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6472/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 February 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal heard the contentions of both parties. In view of the prayer made by the authorized representative of the assessee, supported by a letter dated 10.02.2026, the appeal filed by M/s. Decent Securities (P) Ltd. for Assessment Year 2017-18 was permitted to be withdrawn. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's representative had no objection to this request. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn. The specific reasoning for the withdrawal, as detailed in the assessee's letter, revolved around subsequent orders and a prior ITAT ruling that rendered the current appeal infructuous. The Tribunal did not independently adjudicate on the merits of the original assessment or the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Decent Securities (P) Ltd., filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging an order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. This order arose from an assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee, through their counsel, requested to withdraw the appeal. A letter dated 10.02.2026 was placed on record detailing the reasons for withdrawal, referencing a previous ITAT decision in ITA No. 4799/D/2025. The Revenue's representative did not object to the withdrawal request.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee should be permitted to withdraw the present appeal, which arises from an order of the CIT(A) holding the appeal against the assessment order as infructuous and inadvertent in light of subsequent orders under Section 263 and a fresh assessment order. Assessee's Contention: The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was based on the premise that the appeal before the CIT(A) was rendered infructuous and inadvertent due to a subsequent order under Section 263 of the Act dated 11.3.2022, followed by a fresh assessment order dated 30.3.2023 under Section 143(3)/263. This was further supported by a decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No. 4799/D/2025, which allowed the assessee's appeal arising from an order under Section 263. The ITAT in that prior case had held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had taken a plausible view on the examination of loan creditors under Section 68, and thus, the revision under Section 263 was not warranted. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's representative raised no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 263,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 10.02.2026Pronounced: 10.02.2026

ORDER

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :

1.

1. The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 31.07.2025 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”] in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-3/10397/2019-20 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that the above-captioned appeal may be permitted to be withdrawn. A letter dated 10.02.2026 Page | 1 is also placed on record. For the sake of convenience, the relevant contents of the letter are reproduced as under:-

1.

“The hearing in the captioned appeal filed by the assessee is fixed for hearing today i.e. 10.2.2026.

2. It is submitted that appellant seeks to liberty to withdraw the present appeal arising out of order dated 31.7.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by holding that appeal filed by the assessee against an order of assessment dated 31.12.2019 u/s 143(3) of the Act as infructuous and inadvertent in light of the order dated 11.3.2022 u/s 263 of the Act followed by an order of assessment dated 30.3.2023 u/s 143(3)/263 of the Act. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal in dated 31.12.2025 allowing the appeal of the appellant arising from the order dated 18.3.2025 u/s 263 of the Act. The Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under: "12. The Id CIT(A) in the first round of proceedings had also understood that the Id PCIT in the first revision order u/s 263 of the Act had indeed directed the Id AO to pass fresh assessment order. Hence, the Id AO looking into the additional evidences which are available on record in respect of 15 loan creditors cannot be treated as not complying with the direction of the Id PCIT. In fact the wording couched by the Id PCIT in the first revision order, understanding by ld CIT(A) in first round of proceedings and understanding by the Id AO in the second round of proceedings are on the same lines that the Id AO was directed to frame fresh assessment. At the time of framing of fresh assessment, the additional evidences that were placed by the assessee before the Id CIT(A) in the first round of proceedings were also available on record. We find that the Id AO in the giving effect proceedings to Section 263 was in possession of additional evidences filed by the assessee before the Id CIT(A) as mentioned in para 4 supra to prove the 3 ingredients of Section 68 in respect of 15 loan creditors. These documents are very much available on record before the Id AO while passing the giving effect order. The Id AO in the giving effect proceedings had understood that he has to frame a fresh assessment order pursuant to the directions of the Id PCIT to frame the assessment afresh. Accordingly, the Id AO on verification of the additional evidences that are already Page | 2 on record, was convinced in respect of 15 loan parties and hence, chose not to make any addition u/s 68 of the Act. Hence, the Id AO, on appreciation of factual evidences available on record had taken a plausible view on the matter of examination of 15 loan creditors. Once a plausible view has been taken by the Id AO, the same cannot be subjected to revision u/s 263 of the Act." A copy of the order of Hon'ble ITAT is enclosed.

3. The appellant company shall be highly grateful for kind consideration of the prayer made herein-in-above.”

3.

Ld. CIT DR for the Revenue raised no objection in this regard.

4.

We have heard the contentions of the Ld. Authorized representatives of both parties and perused the material available on record. In view of the prayer made by Ld. Authorized representative ITA of the assessee vide letter dated 10.02.2026, No.6472/Del/2025 [Assessment Year 2017-18] in the case of M/s. M/s. Decent Securities (P.) Ltd. is permitted to be withdrawn. Hence, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10.02.2026.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →