CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

Latabai Vijay Jadhav, Shahada vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Dhule Circle, Dhule

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

…ot gone into the merits of the issues in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 2…

Yogesh Balwant Patil, Nashik vs. ITO, Ward2(1), Nashik

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.910/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

…gone into the merits of the issues in appeal, 3 merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 2…

Vishwakalyan Multi State Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Aurangabad vs. Circle 1, Aurangabad

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.909/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

…ot gone into the merits of the issues in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 2…

Mr. Yogesh Kulthe, Airoli, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Panvel, Dist. Raigad

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.940/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

…not gone into the merits of the issue in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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, 5 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 Sectio…

Sunita Mohan Patil, Nashik vs. ACIT 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.939/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

…t gone into the merits of the issue in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the 5 case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 2…

Sandeep Satyanarayan Biyani, Aurangabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.925/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sandeep Satyanarayan Biyani, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Plot No.98, Flat No.03, Aurangabad Parvati App., Jyoti Nagar, Aurangabad - 431002 Maharashtra Pan : Alepb6232G Appellant Respondent

…not gone into the merits of the issue in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 25…

Pallavi Constructions, Parbhani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Jalna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.741/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

…not gone into the merits of the issue in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs.Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 25…

Yashwant Limji Chaudhari, Nashik vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Nashik

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.715/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Yashwant Limji Chaudhari, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), S.No.902, Plot No.138, Nashik Varad, Mumbai-Agra Highway, Chetana Nagar, Nashik-422009 Maharashtra Pan : Adlpc0225H Appellant Respondent

…not gone into the merits of the issues in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs.Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held 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 25…

Mindspace Versonal Information, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.612/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Mindspace Ventures Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Plot No.4, Jay Nagar, Aurangabad Dashmeshnagar, Aurangabad 431 005 Maharashtra Pan : Aagcm3686H Appellant Respondent

…dealt with the merits of the issues in appeal, even in the case of an ex-parte order. 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. 3 Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo disposal of the issues in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly…

Sudhir Yashwant Kadam, Ratnagiri vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ratnagiri

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.767/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sudhir Yashwant Kadam, V The Income Tax Officer, H.No.127, Bahutule Wadi, S Ward-1, Ratnagiri. Mavlange, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra – 415616. Pan: Abfpk2131A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 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], Delhi U/Sec.250 Of The Act Dated 16.02.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ito Of Rs.13,47,713/- Representing The Total Of Cash Deposits In The Bank Account, Ignoring Submission Of The Appellant That: A. The Source Of The Cash Deposit Being Out Of His Business Turnover No Addition Is Sudhir Yashwant Kadam [A]

…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 : 2 Sudhir Yashwant Kadam [A] 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 a…

Smt Nayana D Nimkar, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle-13, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.706/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Nayana Diwakar Nimkar, Vs. Dcit, Circle-13, 1025-A, Gokhale Road, Pune Shivaji Nagar, Pune 411 016 Maharashtra Pan : Abmpn7535L Appellant Respondent

…e dealt with the merits of the issues in appeal, even in the case of an ex-parte order. 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 CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on 3 merits. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo disposal of the issues in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purp…

Sujata Suresh Nikam, Kalamboli Panvel vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -5 Panvel, Panvel

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.474/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujata Suresh Nikam, V The Income Tax Officer, Kl 4/10/3, Sector 4E, S Ward-5, Panvel. Kalamboli, Maharashtra – 410218. Pan: Abspn5521A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Kadrekar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.06.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) – Nfac Has Erred In Confirming Order Imposing Penalty U/S 271B Of The Act Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Panvel. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Failed To Consider The Sujata Suresh Nikam [A]

…assessee for non- compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 2 Sujata Suresh Nikam [A] 4.2 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…

Shaikh Ayub Shaikh Mahebub Qureshi, Parbhani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Parbhani

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shaikh Ayub Shaikh Mahebub V The Income Tax Officer, Qureshi, S Ward, Parbhani. Khureshi Traders, Khureshi Mohala, Purna, Parbhani, Maharashtra – 431511. Pan: Bkjpk1916R Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Mrs. M.N.Kulkarani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 04.01.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing Appellant’S Appeal Alleging ‘Unexplained Cash Deposit In The Bank Account' In Para 5.2. Appellant Prays For Allowing Assessee'S Appeal Cancelling Addition Made By Assessing Officer As Issue Before Cit[A] Is Income Assessed Estimating Profit. Shaik Ayub Shaikh Mahebub Qureshi [A]

…dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 4.2 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…

Santosh Krushna Ghule, Satara vs. ITO, Ward-5, Satara

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.461/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Santosh Krushna Ghule, V The Income Tax Officer, 165/9, Sahu Nagar, Godolo, S Ward-5, Satara. Satara – 415001. Maharashtra. Pan: Ayopg3325J Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Prateek Jha – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 13.01.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Granting Him Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard & The Impugned Order Deserves To Be Set Aside. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Erred In Not Appreciating That The Ld Ao Had Assessed An Amount Of Rs.53,24,743/- As Long Term Capital Gains Without Santosh Krushna Ghule [A]

…ssessee for non- compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 3 Santosh Krushna Ghule [A] 4.2 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…

Jaymitra Suna, Sambalpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.820/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

…e dealt with the merits of the issues in appeal, even in the case of an ex-parte order. In this regard, reference 4 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 CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. 7. In the light of above discussion, I deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo disposal of the issues in accordance with law. I order accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee st…