Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF, Sriganganagar V. ACIT, Circle-1, Sriganganagar

ITA 164/JODH/2018

AI Insights

The case involved an appeal by Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner, dated 15.03.2018, concerning the assessment year 2013-14. The appeal was based on several grounds challenging the order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which pertained to the revision of the assessment order passed under section 143(3). The assessee contended that the revision was unjustified and lacked proper findings on how the original assessment was erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. However, before the tribunal could deliberate on these issues, the assessee requested to withdraw the appeal, which was granted by the tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122848 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order
• Section: 263; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR VIRTUAL HEARING BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM ITA No.164/Jodh/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2013-14) Shri Ramavtar Ma hipal HUF Prop. M/s Shobha Chand Mahipal & Sons, 20 New Dhan Mandi, Sriganganagar Vs ACIT, Circle-01, Srig anganagar (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAHHR 9417 D Assessee By Sh. Rajendra Jain, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR Date of hearing 14/07/2023 Date of Pronouncement 02/08/2023 O R D E R PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner dated 15.03.2018 [here in after (PCIT)] for assessment year 2013-14. 2 ITA No. 164/Jodh/2018 Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Id Pr. CIT. Bikaner u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961 is bad in law, bad in facts and perverse. 2 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld Pr. CIT. Bikaner erred in not recording own satisfaction in respect of assessment order passed by the id AO is erroneous so as it prejudicial the interest of revenue as per provision of section 263 of the Act. 3] That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id Pr. CIT. Bikaner grossly erred in setting aside the assessment order passed by the u/s 143(3) without any finding as to how the assessment order passed by the Id AO is erroneous so as it prejudicial the interest of revenue. 4] That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld Pr. CIT, Bikaner erred in recording various finding in the order are contrary to the material available on record. 5. That the petitioner may kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing. 6] The petitioner prays for justice & relief.” 3. At the time of hearing of this appeal the ld. AR applied before the bench vide his application dated 26.05.2023 prayed for withdrawal of the appeal for which ld. DR has no objection. Hence, the Bench allows the assessee to withdraw the appeal. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn. 3 ITA No. 164/Jodh/2018 Shri Ramavtar Mahipal HUF Order pronounced under rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, by placing the details on the notice board. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) Judcial Member Accountant Member D at e d : 0 2 / 08 /2 02 3 *G a ne s h K u m a r , P S Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench