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)

Shakeel Abdul Azeez Mohammad, Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jalgaon

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

ITA 1742/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1742/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shakeel Abdul Azeez V The Income Tax Officer, Mohammad, S Ward-1(1), Jalgaon. Kachchi Chawl, Indira Nagar, Shahu Nagar, Jalgaon – 425001. Pan: Byfpm1596K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vinay V. Kawdia – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/02/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr.Dipak P.Ripote, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under

Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 69A

…ary at the time of hearing of the appeal. 4. As per section 250 of the Act, ld.CIT(A) must adjudicate the grounds raised by assessee. 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…

Mani Munjal, Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Durgapur

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

ITA 1686/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1686/Kol/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mani Munjal, V/S Ito, Ward-1(2), B-110 Sargam Sarani, Durgapur Sector – 2C, Bidhan Nagar, West Bengal-713212 Pan : Azkpm0635J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES “SMC”, KOLKATA BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1686/KOL/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mani Munjal, V/s ITO, Ward-1(2), B-110 Sargam Sarani, Durgapur Sector – 2C, Bidhan Nagar, West Bengal-713212 PAN : AZKPM0635J Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 27.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 03.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 2012- 13 at the instance of assessee is directed against the ord…

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6N, Bangalore

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

ITA 933/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 14A

…r", reflecting due consideration of the issues raised and providing clarity on the conclusions drawn. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [(2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom)] wherein it was held as under: “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 25…

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6, Bangalore

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

ITA 932/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 14A

M.P. Veerachandra Chettiyar, Kadavanthara vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Range-1, Non Corporate Ward-1(50, Kochi

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

ITA 557/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Smt. Divya Ravindran

Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri M.P. Veerachandra Chettiyar, The Income Tax Plot No. 30, Soumya Officer, Nivas, Ward – 1(5), Panorama Residency, Range – 1, Kumaranasan Road, Non-Corporate Kadavanthra, Ward – 1(5), Vs. Kochi – 682 020. Kochi. PAN: ABSPV4230A APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Smt. Divya Ravindran, Assessee by Advocate : Smt. Leena Lal, Snr. AR Revenue by Date of Hearing : 26-11-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27-01-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. CIT(A), Dehi

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

ITA 2477/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2477/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., V The Commissioner Of Tower 14, Cyber City, S Income Tax(Appeals), Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Nfac, Delhi. Pune – 411013. Pan: Aaacj4233B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2014-15; Dated 27.09.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Using Same Statement Of Facts & Findings For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 Whereas The Statement Of Facts & Findings Are Not Relevant At All For Assessment Year 2014-15. Ita No.2477/Pun/2024 [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 250Section 90

…section ITA No.2477/PUN/2024 [A] 251 of the Act, ld.CIT(A) has to decide each and every ground of the appeal raised by the assessee. 6.1 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…

Navneet Kumar Sancheti, Bhopal vs. CIT(A), Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 495/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2013-14 Navneet Kumar Sancheti Nfac Prop. M/S Navnet Kumar Delhi बनाम/ Sancheti, Krishi Upaj Vs. Mandi Ashta (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Acnps5570J Assessee By Shri Govind Rinwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.01.2025

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year:2013-14 Navneet Kumar Sancheti NFAC Prop. M/s Navnet Kumar Delhi बनाम/ Sancheti, Krishi Upaj Vs. Mandi Ashta (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: ACNPS5570J Assessee by Shri Govind Rinwa, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 23.01.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissione…

M/S Lectrodryer Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 330/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.329 & 330/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Madhumita Das

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…iving reasons thereof. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) ITA Nos.329 and 330/Kol/2024 M/s. Lectrodryer Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Bombay)/[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. 14. Considering the totality of the case and the submissions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, I am of the considered opinion that the issues on merit for both the years under appeal deserve to be remitted back to the ld.C…

M/S Lectrodryer Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 329/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.329 & 330/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Madhumita Das

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Shikhar Chand Jain, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 555/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 555/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shikhar Chand Jain Gali No.3, Ashok Vihar Colony, Near Bansal School, Pandri, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Achpj2931Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 555/RPR/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shikhar Chand Jain Gali No.3, Ashok Vihar Colony, Near Bansal School, Pandri, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) PAN : ACHPJ2931Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CA Revenue by : Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 15.01.2025…

Mustafa Katthawala, Kota vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 1156/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 244ASection 45(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 Mustafa Katthawala Prop. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance Petrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA Kota.-324005. बनाम | The DCIT/ACIT, Vs. Circle-2, Kota. स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Sh…

Madan Lal Choudhary, Jaipur vs. ITO-7(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 1059/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodiya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 48

…ing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution, whereas in view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the 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.) 2. The Ld CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition made by the AO who had arbitrarily rejected the explanation of assessee and not considered Indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 75,86,705/- u/s 48 in computing capital gain. 3. The Ld CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition made by the AO who ha…

Satyajeet Gajanan Patil, Kolhapur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Kolhapur

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

ITA 2479/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 69A

…speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act by giving reasons for arriving such decision and adjudication thereof in light of decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances prevailing in the instant case, we are of the opinion that assessee deserves one more opportunity to meet the ends of justice. In view thereof, finding of ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is set aside and the issues on merits are being remitted to the file ld.CIT(A)/NFAC for denovo adjudication to b…

Leena Shankar Shetakr, Mumbai vs. ITO, 15(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6127/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: the CIT(A) had failed to enter appearance before the CIT(A) and make proper representation and therefore, the appeal preferred by the Assessee was dismissed on account of non-prosecution. Further, despite giving assurance, the said tax professional failed to take remedial action and file appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, the Assessee was constrained to approach another tax professional for filing the present appeal. In the meanwhile the time limit for filing appeal before the Tribunal

For Appellant: Shri Mandar BapatFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salukhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

…earing issued by the CIT(A). The appeal preferred by the Assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) on account of non-prosecution. 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 on account of non-prosecution. Accordingly, the CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal on merits. Therefore, we set aside the order, dated 06/10/2024, passed by the C…

Santosh Tukaram Varade, Nashik vs. ITO Ward2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1928/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44ASection 69A

…IT(A)/NFAC to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issues raised in appeal on merits. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[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. 10. Considering the totality of the case and the submissions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that the issues on merit for both the years under appeal deserve to be remitted back to the ld…

Santosh Tukaram Varade, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1927/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44ASection 69A

Ranchi Fuels, Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 532/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.532/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ranchi Fuels Limtara, Nandghat, Baloda Bazar-492 006 (C.G.) Pan: Aatfr0836L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…mandate of 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…

Vijay Krishna Bhandari, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 526/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.526/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vijay Krishna Bhandari Mata Chowra Old Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G)-495 001 Pan: Akxpb0382P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

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

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 45Section 45(1)Section 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

Rupsingh Thansingh Patil, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(5), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2461/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2461/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2461/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Rupsingh Thansingh Patil, Vs The ITO, Plot No.16, Sakarvihar, Ward-2(5), Sadguru Complex, Aurangabad Mayur Par Harsool, Aurangabad 431 003 Maharashtra PAN : AZAPP9651K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ajinkya Vaishampayan Revenue by : Shri Vinod Pawar Date of hearing : 24.12.2024 Date of pronouncement : 07.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12 is…

Maharashtra Vij Kamgar Mahasangh Sahakari Pathasanshta Maryadit, Aurangabad vs. The ITO, Ward 1(6), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2316/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 80P

…es the NFAC to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issue raised in appeal on merits. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. 5 Maharashtra Vij Kamgar Mahasangh Sahakari Pathasanst…