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.

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 614)

Khushal Bhavarlal Khinvasara, Pune vs. CIT (A) 4, Pune

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

ITA 1434/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Khushal Bhavarlal Khinvasara, V The Commissioner Of Flat No.6, Raghuveer Society, S Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Mukund Nagar, Pune – 411037. Pune. Maharashtra. Pan: Aefpk7769D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 04.08.2023For Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Finalizing The Appeal Without Extending The Proper

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 69

…part to dispose of the same on merit and it is not open for him to summarily dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the same by the appellant. This is fortified by Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of CIT Vs Premkumar Arjundas (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom). 6.5 In my considered view, the findings of the AO in the assessment order are self-speaking and do not require any interference. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 4.4 Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. 4.5 We have already mentioned that no one had appeared before us also. However,…

Vahan Motors Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

ITA 160/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…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 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…

Prathamik Shikshak Samitichi Pune Zilha Prathamik Shikshan Sevak Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. ITO Waed 5(2) Pune, Pune

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 619/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.617 To 619/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S.ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 250

…e also observe that the dates of hearing given to the assessee mostly fell during covid-19 pandemic period. Ld.CIT(A) has not dealt the appeals on merits of the case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and without dwelling into merits of the issues and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issues on merits for the years under appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudicati…

Prathamik Shikshak Samitichi Pune Zilha Prathamik Shikshan Sevak Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 5(2) Pune, Pune

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 618/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.617 To 619/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S.ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 250

…e also observe that the dates of hearing given to the assessee mostly fell during covid-19 pandemic period. Ld.CIT(A) has not dealt the appeals on merits of the case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and without dwelling into merits of the issues and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issues on merits for the years under appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudicati…

Prathamik Shikshak Samitichi Pune Zilha Prathamik Shikshan Sevak Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. ITO Ward 5(2) Pune, Pune

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 617/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.617 To 619/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S.ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 250

…e also observe that the dates of hearing given to the assessee mostly fell during covid-19 pandemic period. Ld.CIT(A) has not dealt the appeals on merits of the case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and without dwelling into merits of the issues and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issues on merits for the years under appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudicati…

Vinaya Abhijit Gajendragadkar, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 586/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.586 & 585/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sharad VazeFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 144Section 250

…dition made by Ld. AO. 8. So far as appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 is concerned, we notice that the impugned order is exparte and ld.CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issue on merits to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication to be carried out in light of our observations (supra) about application…

Vinaya Abhijit Gajendragadkar, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 585/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.586 & 585/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sharad VazeFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 144Section 250

…dition made by Ld. AO. 8. So far as appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 is concerned, we notice that the impugned order is exparte and ld.CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issue on merits to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication to be carried out in light of our observations (supra) about application…

Rais Nasir Shekh, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

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

ITA 257/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.257/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

…sessments and faceless appeals have been introduced some assessees are not well versed with the new technological advancements. We would like to quote the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. 6. We therefore taking liberal approach and also in the larger interest of justice deem fit to restore the issues raised on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and for deciding the issue in accordance w…

Man Truck & Bus India Private Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 814/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.814/Pun/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Vs Dcit, Circle 7, Man Truck & Bus India Private Limited, Pune Level 3, Malpani Agile,Pan Card Club Road, Baner, Pune-411045 Maharashtra Pan-Aaecm6932E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Harsh R ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prakash L Pathade

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "सी" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.814/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Vs DCIT, Circle 7, Man Truck & Bus India Private Limited, Pune Level 3, Malpani Agile,Pan Card Club Road, Baner, Pune-411045 Maharashtra PAN-AAECM6932E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Harsh R Shah Revenue by : Shri Prakash L Pathade, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of : 02.05.2025 pronouncement आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMB…

Electronica Finance Limited, Pune vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-1(1), Pune

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

ITA 2629/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2629/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Electronica Finance Limited, V The Dcit, “Audumber”, 101/1, S Circle-1(1), Pune. Erandwane, Dr.Ketkar Road, Pune – 411004. Pan: Aaace4577B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 22/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 19.12.2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…o comply the notices. Therefore, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without discussing the grounds raised by the assessee. 4. 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) asunder : 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 th…

Rakesh Kumar, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bhilai, Durg

ITA 140/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 140/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, 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: 140/RPR/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15) Rakesh Kumar, V Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Ward No.36, Jagir Chowk, s Aaykar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Bhilai, New Khursipar, Bhilai, 490006 (NFAC) Dist: Durg, 494001, C.G. PAN: BBTPK4928E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : None राज" की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S. L…

Ratilal Dagadulal Mutha, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(5), Pune

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

ITA 63/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.63/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Manish Sinha

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

…o the assessee by remitting the issue on merits to the file of ld.CIT(A). Ld. Departmental Representative was fair enough in not opposing the request of the assessee. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. In view thereof and without dwelling into merits of the issues and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issue on merits to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Assessee is at liberty t…