How many judgments cite CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)?

659 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (297 CTR 614), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 250(6), Section 251(1)(a), Section 251(2), Section 147, Section 246A.

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

Issues it is cited on

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

Judgments citing CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

Mobite Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ITO, Ward, 7(1), Pune

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

ITA 1258/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1258/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mobite Technologies Private V The Income Tax Officer, Limited, S. Ward-7(1), Pune. A-701, Victoria Garden, Nagar Road, Kalyani Nagar, Pune – 411006. Maharashtra. Pan: Aafcm7197J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Avachat – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shilpa Nc – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-10, Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 12.02.2025 For A.Y.2021-22, Emanating From The Order U/S.143(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ao Cpc Has Erred In Rejecting Concessional Rate Of Income Tax Of 22% Adopted By Assessee For Calculation Of Tax Liability As Per Itr U/S 115Baa & The Ld. Cit A Erred In Confirming The Same

Section 115Section 115BSection 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

…essing Officer. However, ld.CIT(Appeal) merely dismissed the appeal without adjudicating any of the grounds ITA No.1258/PUN/2025 [A] 5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “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 Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of…

Sharad Goel, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur

ITA 310/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 310/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…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 No: 310/RPR/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sharad Goel, v Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Aarson Motors, Lodhipara chowk, s Central Circle-1, CBD Building, Raipur-492001, C.G. Sector-21, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur-492015, C.G. PAN: AGVPG5894M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Ravi Agrawal, CA राज"…

Devendra Kumar Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward Dausa, Dausa

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

ITA 660/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: This Tribunal. Application For Condonation

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 147Section 250(6)

…CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. 4. Considering the given facts and circumstances of the case, in the larger interest of justice and placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT(C) vs. Prem Kumar Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld. CIT(A), NFAC is obliged to dispose all the appeals on merits even an ex-parte order, I hereby remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opport…

Bhagwan Machindra Mahadik, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 14(5) Pune, Pune

ITA 1340/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 69C

…y dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 4.1 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)(Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “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 Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of t…

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Panaji

ITA 224/PAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

…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 Sr ITA No Assessment Year Appellant Respondent PAN 1 139/PAN/2024 2011-12 2 140/PAN/2024 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner of Uday Anant Kamat Income Tax, ADQPK0025Q Circle-1(1), Panaji, Goa 3 223/PAN/2024 2009-10 4 224/PAN/2024 2010-11 Appearances Assessee by: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 26/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 30/06/2025 ORDER PER G. D. PA…

Shri Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

ITA 223/PAN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Panaji

ITA 140/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

ITA 139/PAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Virat Solvent Private Limited, Surajpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bilaspur

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 384/RPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 384/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2023-24)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

…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 No: 384/RPR/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2023-24) Virat Solvent Private Limited, v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- s Ward No. 3, Near Panch Mandir, 1(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Bilaspur, Bhaiyathan Road, Surajpur-497229, C.G. C.G. PAN: AAHCV3212B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri R. B. Doshi, CA राज" की ओर से / Reve…

Ram Parsad Dav Public School Society, Markanda vs. ITO (Exemptions), Ward, Ambala

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

ITA 752/CHANDI/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(24)(iia)Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…, 250(5), 250(6), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b), and the Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was submitted that the order lacks proper reasoning, thereby contravening the principles laid down in CIT v. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [(2017) 154 DTR 302 (Bom)]. The assessee further contended that the Assessing Officer misunderstood and misapplied the law, resulting in an arbitrary determination of the assessed income at Rs.23,50,119/- without adequate justification, in violation of the principles of natural justice as upheld in Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan [(2010) 9 SCC 4…

Bhandari Construction, Bilaspur vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Bilaspur

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

ITA 331/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.331/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhandari Construction Nutan Chowk, Seepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Aajfb9702B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

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

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69

…the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is not vested with any power to summarily dismiss the appeal on account of 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…

Myvishwa Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Dycit Circle-7, Pune

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

ITA 942/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra, Judicialmember & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.942/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Myvishwa Technologies Pvt. V The Dy.Commissioner Of Ltd., S Income Tax, Circle-7, Flat No.16, Sawali, Pan Mala, Pune. Off Sinhgad Road, Pune- 411030. Maharashtra. Pan: Aafcm9656E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mahavir Jain – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 07.02.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For A.Y.2018-19 Dated 24.02.2021. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)

…of the Act, ld.CIT(A) has to adjudicate each and every ground raised by the assessee on merits of the case. ITA No.942/PUN/2025 [A] 6. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “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 Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of t…

Ellapu Narasamma L/R of Late Ellapu Appa Rao, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Visakhapatnam

ITA 414/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

…ate of the law the CIT(Appeals) is not vested with 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 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 same to…

Shreejee Udyog, Bagru vs. ITO, Ward-7(2) Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 356/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT -DR a

Section 144Section 250(6)

…cution, whereas in view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the 2 SHREEJEE UDYOG VS ITO, WARD 7(2), JAIPUR CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution, 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 addition made by the AO, without deciding the case on merits and arbitrarily rejecting the appeal for non-prosecution.’’ 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noticed that there is delay of 371 days in filing the appeal for which the partner of the assessee firm Shri Ja…

Dinesh Damodar Shukla, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 891/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

…s of hearing. I also notice that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-appearance and has not adjudicated the issues on merits as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 3 Dinesh Damodar Shukla that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. 5. Under the given facts and circumstances and considering the prayer of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, I deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) and adduce in…

Dodde Gowda Prakash, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 856/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N., D.R

Section 250

…ITA No.856/Bang/2025 Dodde Gowda Prakash, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dodde Gowda Prakash 19/1, Kanakapura Road Basavanagudi DCIT Vs. Bangalore 560 004 Circle 6(1)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AHNPP9455A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.R. Respondent by : Sri Balusamy N., D.R. Date of Hearing : 19.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 O R D E R PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal of the assessee is arising…

Kamdhenu Foods, Sangli vs. ITO Ward 1 Sangli, Sangli

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

ITA 689/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.689/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kamdhenu Foods, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 177 Peth Nhag, Ward-1, Sangli Gavali Galli, Sangli – 416 416 Maharashtra PAN : AAIFK8508M Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Shri S. Sadananda Singh Revenue by : Date of hearing : 19.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2025 आदेश / ORDER This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 21.03.2024 of National Faceless Ap…

Kamdhenu Foods, Sangli vs. ITO Ward 1 Sangli, Sangli

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

ITA 688/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.688/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Kamdhenu Foods, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 177 Peth Nhag, Ward-1, Sangli Gavali Galli, Sangli – 416 416 Maharashtra Pan : Aaifk8508M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.688/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Kamdhenu Foods, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 177 Peth Nhag, Ward-1, Sangli Gavali Galli, Sangli – 416 416 Maharashtra PAN : AAIFK8508M Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Shri S. Sadananda Singh Revenue by : Date of hearing : 17.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2025 आदेश / ORDER This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 15.01.2025 of National Faceless App…

Jds Capital Markets Private Limited, Jds Chambers Raipur vs. ITO, Ward -1(2), Raipur

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

ITA 309/RPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.309/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jds Capital Markets Private Limited 6, Central Avenue, Choube Colony, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aabcj0428P

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 68

…te of law the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is not vested with 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…

Chandrakant Vaijanathappa Khanapure, Nanded vs. ITO Ward 1 Nanded, Nanded

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

ITA 779/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.779/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chandrakant Vaijanathappa V The Income Tax Officer, Khanapure, S Ward-1, Nanded. 34 Deep Nagar, Near Bsnl Office, Nanded – 431601. Maharashtra. Pan: Aropk0786G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

Section 142Section 144Section 250Section 69A

…. 4.1 Thus, the decision relied by ld.CIT(A) is no more applicable. 5. Be it as it may be, Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “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 ITA No.779/PUN/2025 [A] Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as fou…