MANJU LATA SULTANIA,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 92/RPR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 April 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the original controversy no longer survived due to the concessions made by the Assessing Officer in subsequent proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax. During the proceedings, the Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's claims for deductions under Sections 80C and 80D and allowed depreciation on a motor car, albeit with a minor disallowance.

What were the issues?

The appeal was filed against an order that was subsequently rendered moot by the Assessing Officer's revised assessment, leading to the withdrawal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 144B,Section 80C,Section 80D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kumar Agrawal, CA
Hearing: 17.04.2023Pronounced: 19.04.2023

आदेश / ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

1.

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1 (for short ‘Pr. CIT’) dated 25.03.2022, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’), dated 11.12.2019 for A.Y. 2017-18.

2.

At the very outset of hearing of the appeal it was submitted by the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee that as per instruction he seeks to withdraw the present appeal. Elaborating on the reasons leading to the withdrawal of the present appeal, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as the A.O in the course of set-aside proceedings had vide his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.263 r.w.s.144B of the Act dated 23.03.2023 substantially accepted the assessee’s claim for deduction u/ss. 80C & 80D of the Act and found his claim for deduction of depreciation on motor car in order, therefore, the controversy which had led to the filing of the present appeal does no more survive.

3.

The respondent-department despite having been intimated about the hearing of the appeal had neither put up an appearance nor moved any application seeking adjournment before us.

3 Manju Lata Sultania Vs. Pr. CIT, Raipur-

4.

On a perusal of the records, it transpires that as stated by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 23.03.2023 had substantially accepted the assessee’s claim for deduction u/ss. 80C & 80D of the Act. Also the disallowance of the assessee’s claim for depreciation on motor car was restricted by the A.O to a miniscule amount of Rs.30,383/-. As the assessee had accepted the aforesaid part disallowances made by the A.O in the course of set-aside proceedings, therefore, for the said reason she had sought liberty to withdraw the present appeal.

5.

Considering the aforesaid concession of the Ld. AR we permit withdrawal of the present appeal.

6.

Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of our aforesaid observations.

Order pronounced in open court on 19th day of April, 2023.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →