RIYA AND COMPANY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD
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 allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn because the consequential assessment proceedings were dropped by the Assessing Officer.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263. During the hearing, the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the assessee's appeal should be withdrawn. The withdrawal was sought due to the dropping of consequential assessment proceedings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE
आदेश/O R D E R
PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ahmedabad [“PCIT” in short] dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 263 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 [“the Act” in short].
At the time of hearing fixed in this case today, i.e. on 29.07.2022, it is noticed that the assessee has filed a letter dated 14th July, 2022 seeking permission to withdraw the appeal on the ground that the consequential assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act were dropped by the concerned Assessing Officer. The assessee, therefore, pleaded that the appeal filed by it may be dismissed as withdrawn. The Riya And Company Vs. Pr. CIT AY : 2017-18 2 learned Departmental Representative has no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal filed by the assessee. In view of these facts, we allow the withdrawal of the appeal filed by the assessee; and, accordingly appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 29th July, 2022 at Ahmedabad.
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 →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026