CIT v. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

297 ITR 614High Court2017#17553 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 250(6)Section 272A(2)(e)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 25section 250nfac

Judgments citing CIT v. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

Kaoser Charitable Trust, Kannur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Kannur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for

ITA 487/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, Sr AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 272A(2)(e)Section 68

…t he will decide the merits of the case irrespective of the fact that whether anybody appeared from the side of the assessee or not. A reference can be made to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF ) (2017) 297 ITR 614 (Bom), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court has held that the ld CIT(A) is duty bound to decide the appeals after dealing with the merits of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, we hereby restore these appeals to the file of the ld CIT(A) to decide afresh. Needless to say that the ld CIT(A) will grant meaningful opportunity to t…

Kaoser Charitable Trust, Kannur vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Kannur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for

ITA 486/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, Sr AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 272A(2)(e)Section 68

…t he will decide the merits of the case irrespective of the fact that whether anybody appeared from the side of the assessee or not. A reference can be made to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF ) (2017) 297 ITR 614 (Bom), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court has held that the ld CIT(A) is duty bound to decide the appeals after dealing with the merits of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, we hereby restore these appeals to the file of the ld CIT(A) to decide afresh. Needless to say that the ld CIT(A) will grant meaningful opportunity to t…

Pinky Sachdev, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 52/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.52/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Pinky Sachdev, Ito (Tds), ‘Nitya’, Plot No.25, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Krishna Sakha Society, Rohini Puram, Raipur-492 001 [Pan: Atsps 8079 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri Nikhilesh Begani, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2023

For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma
Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 206ASection 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH: RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "ाियक सद", एवं "ी अ"ण खोडिपया, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.52/RPR/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 v. Pinky Sachdev, ITO (TDS), ‘Nitya’, Plot No.25, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Krishna Sakha Society, Rohini Puram, Raipur-492 001 [PAN: ATSPS 8079 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant by Shri Nikhilesh Begani, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. D.R.…

Culture Company India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4543/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv WagalyFor Respondent: Smt. Hemalatha
Section 250

…R. that the CIT(A) has given only one opportunity and thereafter dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the case. He placed on record the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Premkumar Arjundas Luthra dated 25th April, 2016 (297 ITR 614) in support of the proposition that law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss an appeal for non prosecution. 3. I have considered the rival submissions and found that after giving only one opportunity the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal. He has also not discussed the issue on merits whereas, as per provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 250 t…

Parshwa Marketing (I) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 5(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4530/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh MohanFor Respondent: Smt. Hemalatha
Section 25o

…CIT(A) for deciding afresh on merits after 2 ITA 4530/Mum/2017 M/s. M/s. Parshaw Marketing (I)Pvt. Ltd. giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Our view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 297 ITR 614. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th October, 2017. (R.C. Sharma) Accountant Member Mumbai, Dated: 26th October, 2017 Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) -10, Mumbai 4. The Pr. CIT - 5, Mumbai 5. The DR, “SMC” Bench, ITAT, Mumbai…