M.VYDESWARAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1142/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 June 2016AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel requested to withdraw the appeal as the assessee was not interested in prosecuting it. The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263. The original assessment had made an addition of Rs. 8.23 lakhs towards non-business related interest paid by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, leading to a direction to redo the assessment.

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, ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR

आदेश / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Trichy passed u/s.263 of the Act dated 27.03.2015 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

In this case, the original assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2012 wherein the AO made addition of `8.23 lakhs towards interest paid by the assessee which are not relating to the business. The ld. CIT issued notice u/s.263 of the Act on16.05.2013. According to the Commissioner of Income Tax, the AO had not carried

ITA No.1142/Mds./2015 :- 2 -: on requisite enquiry before the completion of the assessment, as such the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Accordingly, Ld.CIT set aside the assessment order with a direction to redo the same after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

At the time of hearing, ld.A.R filed a letter dated 14.06.2016 stating that assessee in this case has not interested in prosecuting this appeal and has sought permission from the Bench to withdraw the appeal. Considering the plea of assessee’s counsel, we are inclined to permit the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17th June, 2016, at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →