] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE , ! ' , # $ BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO.446/PUN/2015 % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI PAWAN ASHOK MANDORE, C/O. DAMYANTI INDUSTRIES, 29, BALAJI PETH, JALGAON. PIN 425 001. PAN : AAUPM 2725N. . APPELLANT VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KENDRIYA RAJASWA BHAWAN, GADKARI CHOWK, OLD AGRA ROAD, NASHIK 422 002. .RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED) / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUHAS KULKARNI & / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE ORDER OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 2, NASHIK DT.24.03.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. / DATE OF HEARING : 30.03.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.03.2017 2 1. ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL STATED TO BE EARNING SALARY AN D INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INC OME ON 31.07.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,12,800/-. ON 26.07.2011 ASSESSEE FILED REVISED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,72,554/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DT.18.03.2013 AND TOTAL INCOME WAS DET ERMINED AT RS.4,89,186/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, LD.CIT ON VERIFYING THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE OR DER PASSED BY THE AO U/SEC.143(3) OF THE ACT WAS ERRONEOUS AND PRE JUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE AND THEREFORE HE VIDE ORDER DT.2 4.03.2015 PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT DIRECTED THE AO TO RE-EXAMIN E THE ISSUES AS STATED IN THE ORDER AND TO PASS A FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF AS SESSEE BUT HOWEVER VIDE LETTER DT.22.03.2017 WHEREIN INTER-ALIA IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AGAINST THE ORDER OF AO PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE HAD PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A) WHO HAS GIVEN PARTIAL RELIEF AND THEREBY THE REVISED TOTAL INCOME HA S BEEN DETERMINED AT RS.8,89,150/-. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THA T CONSIDERING SMALLNESS OF TAX EFFECT AND COST OF LITIGATION, THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. LD. D.R. HAD N O OBJECTION TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. 3 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS LETTER DT.22.03.2017, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED AS WITHDRAWN. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 30 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017. SD/- SD/- ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 30 TH MARCH, 2017. YAMINI & ' (!)* +*! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1 . / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3 . 4. 5 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NASHIK !' # 1 #$%, ' $% , / DR, ITAT, A PUNE; '() * / GUARD FILE. & / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // TRUE COPY // , -./0 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ' $% , / ITAT, PUNE.