SATISH B. RAHEJA,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4589/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 March 2018AY 2005-063 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's application for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as there was no further tax effect and the department had not challenged the CIT(A)'s order. The grounds raised by the assessee were considered academic.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be withdrawn due to lack of tax effect and no departmental appeal, rendering the grounds academic.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh Trivedi, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR
Hearing: 08/03/2018Pronounced: 27/03/2018

ORDER

PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM

1.

The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-58, Mumbai and arise out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) rw.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the ‘Act’). As common issues are involved, we are proceeding to dispose them off through a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

Shri Satish B. Raheja 2 & 4590/Mum/2016 2. The Ld. counsel of the assessee filed an application dated 06.03.2018 for withdrawal of appeal submitting the following: “In the matter, the appellant submits that there would not be any further tax effect out of the appeal filed by the appellant. The appellant has not been served with notice/intimation of any appeal having been filed by the Department challenging the order of the CIT(A) as the Department appears to have accepted the order of the CIT(A), the grounds raised by the appellant become academic in nature. In such circumstances, the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal filed before the ITAT, with liberty to have his appeal reinstated in the event the Department has in fact filed an appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A). The appellant submits that the withdrawal of aforesaid appeal in terms aforesaid should not be construed as acceptance of the order of the CIT(A) by the appellant upholding reassessment on a different ground and holding appellant’s power of attorney holder to be constituting a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment.” There was no opposition by the Ld. DR to the above application of the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is permitted to withdraw the appeal. Thus the appeals are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/03/2018. Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (N.K. PRADHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 27/03/2018 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →