CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

297 CTR 614High Court2017#86 most cited

What is CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) authority for?

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution or default in appearance. Under Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits, even in an ex parte proceeding.

659

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF · Section 250(6) Income Tax Act · CIT(A) appeal dismissal · non-prosecution of appeal · default in appearance appeal · ex parte order merits · duty to decide on merits · Bombay High Court 297 CTR 614

Also reported as

240 Taxmann 133

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 147Section 246ASection 251(1)(b)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 251(2)section 251(1)(a)section 250(4)section 251(1)section 246asection 246section 251section 250(6)section 249(3)section 24non-speaking orderspeaking order

Judgments citing CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

Gurmeet Singh Hora, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur

ITA 358/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 358, 359 & 360/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22)

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ,रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधर", "ाियक सद" एवं "ीअ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos: 358, 359 & 360/RPR/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22) Gurmeet Singh Hora, A-1, Sai Nagar, v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Raipur (C.G.) Chhattisgarh 492001 s 1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Chhattisgarh, 492001 PAN: AAOPH6268D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri R.B. Doshi,…

Mrs. Nidhi Yadav, Dehradun vs. ITO, Rudrapur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.115/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.117/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 Nidhi Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-801, Forest Residency, Ward 2(1)(4), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Income Tax Office, Pin Code: 248014 Rudrapur, Uttarakhand Pan: Acapy5157E (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Mohit Dev, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amarpal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF, (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A) could not have…

Smt. Nidhi Yadav, Dehradun vs. ITO- W-2(1)(4), Rudrapur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 115/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.115/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.117/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 Nidhi Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-801, Forest Residency, Ward 2(1)(4), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Income Tax Office, Pin Code: 248014 Rudrapur, Uttarakhand Pan: Acapy5157E (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Mohit Dev, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amarpal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF, (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A) could not have…

Srithik Ispat Private Limited, Goa vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Panaji, Goa, Panaji

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 Pan : Aaics1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Din & Order No 1068425181(1) Dt. 06/09/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Originated From Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. [‘Ld. Ao’].

For Appellant: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)Section 40Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 PAN : AAICS1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; This assessee’s appea…

Sandeep Kaur Gill, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer. Ward 3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 236/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.236/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/102, Shukla Colony, Ravi Shankar, Shukla Ward, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 5

…ith 7 Sandeep Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur any power to summarily dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom). In the aforementioned case the Hon’ble High Court had observed as under: "8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the sam…

Bhagavan Devaram Patil, Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Jalgaon

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

ITA 1447/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250

…isdictional Assessing Officer, if necessary, and after considering the submissions/evidences filed by the assessee shall pass a speaking order in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the…

Progressive Ambar Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO - Ward 28(2)(1), Navi Mumbai

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3603/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: the CIT(A) in appeal instituted on 17/12/2022 which was dismissed on 07/04/2025. As a result, the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv BrahmeFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat
Section 154Section 250Section 80P(2)(d)

…ferred by the Assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) without examining the merits and on account of non-prosecution of appeal. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Nagpur Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF): [2016] 240 Taxman 133 (Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay)[25-04-2016], it has been held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court that the provisions of the Act do not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal preferred by an Assessee 2 Assessment Year 2021-2022 on account of non-prosecution. Accordingly, the CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal on merits. Therefore, we set aside the order, date…

Raj Kumar Jat, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Behror

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

ITA 619/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Tarun MittalFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh
Section 147Section 194CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 44A

…ide proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences before ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the case. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is se…

Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti, Jaipur vs. Exemption Ward 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 515/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri R.S. PooniaFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

…ide proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences before ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the case. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is se…

Sh.Sudesh Verma, Dehradun vs. ITO, W-1(2)(4), Dehradun

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 86/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF, (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A) could not have…

Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(Exemption), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 444/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ITA No. 444/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 444/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [PAN:AAATB7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office of the Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances by: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate and Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri So…

Vijay Israni, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6, Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 752/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

…merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF, (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on various 5 Vijay Israni points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A…

Promotional Club, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-28(1), Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.748 /Del./2025, A.Y. 2017-18 Promotional Club Income Tax Officer, D-815, New Friends Colony, Ward-28(1), Civic Centre, New Delhi - 110025 Vs. Minto Road, New Delhi Pan: Aajfp4348R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

Section 115BSection 234BSection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 68

…merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF, (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays 6 Promotional Club role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the C…

Ajay Mahesh Shivdasani, Thane vs. Circle 1, Kalyan

ITA 2558/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pilla (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Ajay Mahesh Shivdasani Acit, Circle-2 Flat 201, Konark Residency Mohan Plaza, Near Near Shahad Station Vs. Poddar School, Vaile Ulhasnagar-1, Thane Nagar, Kahadkpada Maharashtra-421 001. Kalyan, Dombivali Pan : Bcbps3471B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya M. RaiFor Respondent: Shri Sanket Joshi(Virtually)
Section 115BSection 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…e case and in law. 2. The assessee submits that the appellate order passed by CIT(A) in limine without deciding the issue on merits is not justified in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Premkumar Arjundas Luthra [(2017) 297 CTR 614] and hence, the said appeal may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for passing a speaking order on merits afresh. 3. The appellant submits that there was a reasonable cause due to which the notices issued by the CIT(A) could not be complied with in as much as the notices of hearing u/s 250 were issued on the email ids surya.ca1989(gmail.com a…

Nayan Real Estate Private Limited, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 7(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2330/MUM/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Nayan Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ito Ward 7(3)(1) Shop 2, Ground Floor, Ivy Room No. 126J Building No. 2, Hubtown Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Gardenia Shantivan, Mira M.K. Road Road East, Maharashtra Mumbai-40 0020. 401 107. Pan : Aadcn7524J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Ved (Virtually)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) Nayan Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. ITO Ward 7(3)(1) Shop 2, ground Floor, IVY Room No. 126J Building No. 2, Hubtown Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Gardenia Shantivan, Mira M.K. Road Road East, Maharashtra Mumbai-40 0020. 401 107. PAN : AADCN7524J Appellant Respondent : Shri Pavan Ved (Virtually) Assessee by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui Revenue by : 03/07/2025 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 25/07/2025 O R D E R Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :- In the above cited appeal, the appellant fi…

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 212/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA and Shri Vikas Yadav AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ng the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution whereas in view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-proseuction as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Premkumar Arjundas Luthra, HUF (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.) 3. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the penalty imposed by the AO and not considering the facts of the case in the proper perspective. 4. The Appellant craves leave to take additional grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal and / or modify any of the above grounds. 2.1 During the course o…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 275/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this bunch of appeals are allowed for statistical…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Wrd-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 274/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this bunch of appeals are allowed for statistical…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this bunch of appeals are allowed for statistical…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 272/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this bunch of appeals are allowed for statistical…