PRINCE MULTIPLAST P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT-7, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2239/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 August 2016AY 2010-112 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 assessee's counsel stated that the appeal was not pressed as substantial relief was granted by the AO and remaining additions were contested before the CIT(A). The CIT DR did not object to the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment order was passed by the DCIT under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2010-11.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be withdrawn as the assessee was not interested in pursuing it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi K. Joshi, AR
For Respondent: Shri Alok Jain, CIT DR

O R D E R

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Principal CIT- 7, Mumbai in appeal No.Pr.CIT-7/263/2014-15 dated 17-03-2015 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). Assessment was framed by the DCIT, Circle-7 (1), Mumbai vide his order dated 31-12-2012 for assessment year 2010-11 u/s 143 (3) of the Act.

2.

At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee made a statement at the Bar that she has instruction from the assessee not to press this appeal for the reason that substantial relief has been granted by the AO while framing assessment in consequence to revision Order passed by the Principal CIT u/s 263 of the Act. Balance additions sustained by the AO are being contested before the CIT (A). She stated that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal.

3.

On query from the Bench, the learned CIT DR has not objected to withdrawal of the appeal. In view of this, we permit withdrawal of the appeal and dismiss the same as not pressed.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →