HARSHAD CHAUDHARY,RAIPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, RAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Since the grievance that led to the appeal no longer survived, and the revenue did not object, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Pr. CIT had set aside the assessment order and directed a fresh assessment. The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as the fresh assessment order was passed in their favour.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed against a revision order under Section 263 can be withdrawn when the subsequent assessment order is favorable to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL
आदेश/ ORDER
PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, (for short ‘Pr. CIT’) u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’), dated 26.03.2021, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) of the Act dated 22.12.2018 for assessment year 2016-17.
At the very outset of the hearing of appeal, it was submitted by Shri Praveen Khandelwal, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee that as instructed liberty is sought for withdrawing the captioned appeal. Elaborating on the reasons for withdrawal of the appeal, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee by preferring the present appeal had assailed the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act, dated 26.03.2021 wherein the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 22.12.2018 was set-aside to his file with a direction to frame fresh assessment. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that pursuant to the aforesaid direction of the Pr. CIT the Assessing Officer had passed a fresh assessment order, wherein the claim of the assesee qua the issues on the basis of which the matter was restored to his file for fresh adjudication had been decided in favour of the assessee. In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that now when the 3 Harshad Chaudhary Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur Assessing Officer in his fresh assessment order had not drawn any adverse inferences against the assessee therefore, the latters grievance which had its genesis in the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 i.e, on the basis of which the present appeal was filed do not survive any more. Backed by his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that liberty be granted to withdraw the present appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’) did not raise any objection for seeking of withdrawal of the present appeal by the assessee.
We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties. In the backdrop of the aforesaid concession of the Ld. AR who had sought for liberty to withdraw the present appeal, which had not been objected by the Ld. DR, we, herein, allow the same.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of our aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th day of April 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- JAMLAPPA D BATTULL RAVISH SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; �दनांक / Dated : 05th April, 2022 SB
4 Harshad Chaudhary Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026