ATMAN OVERSEAS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6(1)(4), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the First Appellate Authority. During the hearing, the assessee's counsel requested permission to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the reopening of assessment. However, the appeal was withdrawn by the assessee before the merits were adjudicated.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ramit Kochar
Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 01/10/2015 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority,
2 Atman Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai, on the grounds of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act).
During hearing, Shri N.R. Rao, Ld. counsel for the assessee, requested the Bench to grant permission to withdraw the appeal filed by the assessee (see noting at page-1 of the grounds of appeal). Shri Rajat Mittal, Ld.
DR, had no objection to the request of the assessee.
In view of the above, the assessee is permitted
to withdraw the appeal, therefore, it is dismissed as withdrawn.
Finally, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 28/03/2018. (Ramit Kochar) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated :28/03/2018 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/."न.स.
3 Atman Overseas Pvt. Ltd. आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai
"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- 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