DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. CTR MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED , PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1005/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 February 2024AY 2011-12Bench: HON’BLE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the Revenue's application for withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) concerning assessment year 2011-12. The Revenue later sought to withdraw the appeal due to a technical glitch that caused it to be filed inadvertently.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed inadvertently due to technical glitches can be withdrawn by the appellant. The primary issue was the procedural aspect of withdrawing an appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: HON’BLE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]
Pronounced: 15/02/2024

द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee by : Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 15/02/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; This appeal is filed against the first appellate DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1054396844(1) dt. 17/07/2023 anent to assessment year 2011-12 [for short ‘AY’] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [for short ‘NFAC’] passed u/s 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] which in turn arisen out of order of penalty dt. 28/03/2018 imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Pune [for short ‘AO’]

2.

At the outset, the Ld. DR Mr Murkunde referring to the Revenue’s letter of withdrawal dt. 07/02/2024, recited its contents and stated that, two appeals against the impugned order are filed online with an acknowledgement no. 1694698350 & ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 2

DCIT Vs CTR Manufacturing Industries Pvt Ltd., 1694695463 which are registered as ITA No. 1006/PUN/2 . The present appeal is one of those two appeals which inadvertently got filed due to technical glitches and since two appeals against one impugned cannot lie, therefor it is pressed/prayed for withdrawal. Solidifying the facts the Ld. AR did contend that, this appeal at the choice of the Revenue is to be dismissed and other to be adjudicated.

3.

Heard both the parties and subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963 perused the record and finding the factual position, we accept the application of withdrawal and dismiss the appeal.

4.

The appeal of the Revenue stands DISMISSED as WITHDRAWN. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Thursday, 15th day of February, 2024.

-S/d- -S/d- S. S.VISWANETHRA RAVI G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE ; ददनाांक / Dated : 15th day of February, 2024. आदेशकीप्रनिनलनपअग्रेनषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-Concerned 4.The AO Concerned. 5. The DR, ITAT, ‚A‛ Bench, Pune 6. गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / By Order, वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्यायादधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 2

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →