Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH”, PATNA
(Assessment Year 2017-18) Vikas Kumar, Michael Colony, Baswaria, Bettiah, West Champaran - 845438 [PAN: APHPK1184P] ..............…...…………….... Appellant vs. NFAC, New Delhi -110001 ................................... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Ashish Kr. Agrawal, CA Department represented by : Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 23.04.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 29.04.2025 O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 25.09.2024 for AY 2017-18, in which at para 5 page 3 of the impugned order it is recorded that the assessee had requested for allowing him to withdraw the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) had treated this matter as not pressing any of the grounds of appeal by the assessee and had accordingly dismissed the appeal.
1.1 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee has approached the ITAT by challenging the action of Ld. CIT(A) on the grounds of principles of natural justice and also on merit.
Vikas Kumar 2. The Ld. AR mentioned that indeed they had filed an application for withdrawal of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but he requested that the same may be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication since, thereafter, the situation had changed and the assessee was interested in pursuing the appeal further.
2.1 The Ld. DR supported the impugned order and mentioned that once the appeal was requested for withdrawal at the stage of Ld. CIT(A) then there was no question of any issue surviving for a decision on merits before him.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and gone through the record. The Ld. AR was queried about the specific intention to withdraw the appeal at the first appeal stage and the change of opinion thereafter. The Ld. AR mentioned that thereafter certain situation changed and the assessee was now interested in pursuing the matter on merit. We find that this is very unusual and the assessee does not have the liberty to change his mind at second appeal stage when at first appeal stage he had expressed a written intention to withdraw the appeal. We find that this ground for pursuing the matter, as an afterthought, is not maintainable before us and hence we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the present appeal.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.