, .. , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SMC BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI D.MANMOHAN, VICE PRE SIDENT ./ I.T.A.NO. 530/MDS/2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) MR. S.THALAVAIPANDIAN, NO.26, II CROSS STREET, MOGAPPAIR WEST GARDEN, PHASE-II, CHENNAI-600 037. VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4) CHENNAI. PAN: AWMPS0356F ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MS. K.HEMALATHA, C.A. /RESPONDENT BY : DR. NISCHAL, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 20 TH APRIL, 2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 TH APRIL, 2015 / O R D E R PER D.MANMOHAN, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A)-19, CHENNAI DATED 30.12.2014 AND IT PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. ADDITION OF ` 3,50,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) IS A SUBJECT MATTER OF DISP UTE BEFORE US. IT WAS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TAX AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT ` 3,50,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN FROM HIS BUSINESS DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL AND THE SAME MONEY WAS REINTRODUCED INTO BUSINESS. NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER COULD BE FURN ISHED TO PROVE THE SAME AND, WHEN POINTED OUT, LEARNED AUTHORIZED RE PRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE MAY BE PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW HIS APPEAL. 2 ITA NO. 530 /MDS/2015 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJEC TION IN THIS MATTER. 4. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I DISMISS THE APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) ( D.MANMOHAN ) / VICE PRESIDENT $ /CHENNAI, % /DATED 20 TH APRIL, 2015 SOMU () *) / COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. + () /CIT(A) 4. + /CIT 5. ) / /DR 6. /GF .