, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, M UMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL,(JM) AND SANJAY ARORA (AM . . , ! '# , $% , $% $ & ./I.T.A. NO.503/MUM/2011 ( ' ' ' ' ( ( ( ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) HAKUHOOD PERCEPT PVT LTD., PERCEPT HOUSE, 22, RAGHUVANSHI ESTATE, 11/12, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI-400013 ' ' ' ' / VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 6(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. MARG, MUMBAI. ) $% ./ !* ./PAN/GIR NO. : AABCP 9772 A ( )+ / APPELLANT) .. ( ,-)+ / RESPONDENT) )+ . $ / APPELLANT BY : SHRI PANKAJ JAIN ,-)+ / . $ /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJARSHI DWIVEDI ' / 0% / DATE OF HEARING : 10.4.2013 1'( / 0% /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.4.2013 $2 / O R D E R PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AGAINST ORDER DATED 30.9.2010 OF LD CIT(A)-12, MUMBAI. 2. VIDE LETTER DATED JANUARY 10, 2013, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL AS ASSESSEE HAS GOT RELIEF IN THE ORDER DATED 27.8.2012 PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT BY DELETING THE ADDITION, DISPUTED I N THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE US. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. 2 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD A.R. REITERATED ABOVE SUBMISSIONS AND LD D.R. HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. 3 04 ' 30 %3! / !0 56 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH APRIL, 2014. . $2 / 1'( %$ 7 8'4 10TH APRIL ' / 9 SD/- SD/- ( ! '# /SANJAY ARORA) ( . . /B.R.MITTAL) $% / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 8' DATED 10/04 /2013 . ' . ./ PARIDA , SR. PS $2 $2 $2 $2 / // / ,0: ,0: ,0: ,0: ;$:(0 ;$:(0 ;$:(0 ;$:(0 /COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. )+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-)+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. < ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. < / CIT 5. :=9 ,0' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9> ? / GUARD FILE. $2' $2' $2' $2' / BY ORDER, -:0 ,0 //TRUE COPY// 5 5 5 5 ! ! ! ! ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI