RASHMI SPONGE IRON AND POWER INDUSTRIES,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 98/RPR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 July 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal heard both parties and perused the withdrawal application. In view of the assessee's request, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT. During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee filed an application to withdraw the appeal. The assessee cited reasons including the proceedings becoming time-barred under Section 153(3) of the IT Act.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal, citing procedural and time-barring grounds. The Tribunal considered the validity of this request.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153(3),Section 263,Section 148,Section 148A(d),Section 142(1),Section 144B,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM

Hearing: 20.07.2023Pronounced: 20.07.2023

O R D E R

Per Arun Khodpia, AM :

1.

The present appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), Raipur-1, dated 23.03.2022 for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee wants to withdraw the present appeal. He has also filed an application dated 18.07.2023 for withdrawal of the appeal, which is extracted as under: “It is most humbly requested before this Hon’ble bench to kindly allow us to withdraw the appeal on following facts:- 1) The proceedings u/s 263 of the IT Act, 1961 was started on 09.08.2021 relating to AY 2017-18 during the pendency of re- assessment proceeding already started on 09.06.2021 u/s 148 of the It Act, 1961 and accordingly was objection raised on 08.09.2021 which was not considered by Ld. Pr. CIT, Raipur and alongwith request of personal hearing made on 18.02.2022 before deciding the case and passed the order u/s 263 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 23.03.2023. (Copies attached)

2) The fact that during the pendency of proceedings u/s 148, a submission was also made to Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) on 07.06.2022 about the order of sec. 263 made by Pr. CIT, Raipur which was considered by JAO in his order made u/s 148A(d) of the IT Act, 1961 dated 15.07.2022 and reissue of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 but during the whole proceeding the Ld. AO did not cover the issue relating to matter as per order of Sec. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 dt. 23.03.2022 in its any notice of Sec. 142(1) and SCN also and passed the order u/s 147 w.r.t. Sec. 144B of the IT Act. Dt. 08.05.2023. (Copies attached) 3) As per the provision of Sec. 153(3) of the IT Act, 1961 which provides as under :- “Section 153 : Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and re-computation. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), an order of fresh assessment in pursuance of an order under section 254 or section or section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, may be made at any time before the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the order under section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner: Provided that where the order under section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section is passed by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner on or after the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words "nine months”, the words "twelve months” had been substituted.” Accordingly, the case is now time barred u/s 153(3) of the IT Act, 1961 by limitation as the period of twelve months has elapsed on 31.03.2023 i.e. from the end of the financial year 2021-22 in which the order under section 263 is passed. In view of above we humbly request your honour to kindly allow us to withdraw the appeal and oblige as the proceedings relating to case is time barred.”

3.

When the learned DR was asked to submit his contention regarding the request of assessee for withdrawal of the appeal, he did not object to the same.

More judgments on Section 153(3)

All 171 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →