SRI RAM CONSTRUCTIONS,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (5), PATNA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to pass a speaking order as required by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. The appellate order did not adjudicate on the grounds of appeal or provide reasons for the decision, violating principles of natural justice.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return of income, but failed to comply with notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO made an addition under Section 43CA and passed an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's appeal without adjudicating on merits, citing non-compliance and lack of supporting documents.
What were the issues?
Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits and passed a speaking order. Whether the principles of natural justice were followed by the appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Nagpur v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)159 citing69 Taxmann.com 407 · 2016 · HC
- Ajji Basha v. CIT55 citing111 Taxmann.com 348 · 2019 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
order
: January 28th, 2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2015-16 dated 29.02.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act, dated 30.12.2016.
More judgments on Section 43CA
- Ladam Homes Private Limited, Thane vs ACIT, Circle 1, ThaneITA 5788/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- M/S Suraj & Associates, Mumbai vs ACIT 31(3) / Now ACIT 41(4)(1), MumbaiITA 408/MUM/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Susneh Infrapark Private Limited, MumbaiITA 9262/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
- Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Central… vs Sushneh Infrapark Private Limited, MumbaiITA 9261/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Susneh Infrapark Private Limited, MumbaiITA 9260/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- 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