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)

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centreal Circel-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 37/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. : 034 to 039/NAG/2023 Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2015-16 to 2017-18 M/s Concrete Developers 151/152, Anjali Apartment, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur-440010 PAN: AAAFC6294L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr KC Kanojiya…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 36/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. : 034 to 039/NAG/2023 Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2015-16 to 2017-18 M/s Concrete Developers 151/152, Anjali Apartment, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur-440010 PAN: AAAFC6294L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr KC Kanojiya…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 35/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. : 034 to 039/NAG/2023 Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2015-16 to 2017-18 M/s Concrete Developers 151/152, Anjali Apartment, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur-440010 PAN: AAAFC6294L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr KC Kanojiya…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 34/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. : 034 to 039/NAG/2023 Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2015-16 to 2017-18 M/s Concrete Developers 151/152, Anjali Apartment, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur-440010 PAN: AAAFC6294L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr KC Kanojiya…

Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., Nagpur vs. Director of Income Tax, Nagpur

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

ITA 56/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.56/Nag/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2018-19 Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., The Director Of Income C-108, Hingna Road, Midc V Tax, Industrial Area, Hingna, S Intelligence & Criminal Investigation, 3Rd Floor, Nagpur – 440028. Pan: Aaacb5340H Room No.301, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440001. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajesh Loya – Ca-Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Passed U/S250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Emanating From The Penalty Order Under Section 271Fa Of The Act Dated 27.09.2019 Passed By Director Of Income Tax(Intelligence & Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., [A]

Section 2Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 285Section 285B

…uired file SFT reporting U/s 285 BA of the Act and hence penalty provision u /s 271 FA of the Act. Shall also not applicable at all.” 3.2 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…

Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, Ahmedabad vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 315/AHD/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, The Income-Tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aaaab 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.06.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Deciding Appeal Ex- Parte Without Appreciating That Business Of The Appellant Has Been Closed Since Covid-19 & Therefore, In Absence Of Any Office, Notice(S) Claimed To Be Have Been Served Through Email Could Not Be Communicated To The Partners Of The Appellant. Without Prejudice To This It Is Submitted That No Notice(S) Came To Be Served On The Appellant At The Designated Email Stated In Form No. 35 For The Purpose Of Service Of Notice(S). Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv Vs. Ito Ay : 2005-06 2

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 250Section 250(6)Section 40

…Vs. ITO AY : 2005-06 2 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFSC erred on facts and in law in not deciding the appeal on merits in terms of provisions of section 250(6) r.w.s. 251(1)(a) has held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) 297 CTR 614 (Bom) 3. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in not directing the Assessing Officer to rectify order passed u/s 154 in view of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court holding the amendments in section 40(a)(ia) to be curative and retrospective in nature. 4. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 2,30,59…

Lokmangal Cooperative Bank Limited, Solapur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, NFAC Delhi

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

ITA 1091/PUN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripotelokmangal Cooperative Bank Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Ltd., 128, Murarji Peth, Solapur. Opp. Sevasdan High School, Solapur-413001 (Mh) Pan: Aaaal 0119 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde,Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/04/2024 Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 12.09.2023 For A.Y.2009-10 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. Shingte, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde,DR

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

…en submission nor filed any letter seeking adjournment in response to the notices issued, thus the matter was dismissed for non-prosecution. The Hon'ble Bombay High Lokmangal Co-op. Bank Ltd. Court in the case of CIT v. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bom.) has held as follows:- "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 him as found in Sec. 250 of the Act. Further, S…

M/S. Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistnat Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur

ITA 45/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.45/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Unijules Life Sciences The Assistant Ltd., V Commissioner Of Income B-35/36, Midc, S Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kamleshwar, Nagpur. Nagpur – 441501 Pan: Aaacu8032D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Adv.-Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 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(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 08.11.2011 For The A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From The Order Under Section 153A R.W.S 143(3) Of M/S.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A]

Section 14Section 153ASection 154Section 250

…othered to discuss any of the averments or specific grounds raised by the assessee and merely dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. 3. 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…

Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Pune vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5 Pune, Pune

ITA 1397/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1397/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Namdeo Indarrao Gore, The Dy.Commissioner Of Subhadra Cme Engineers, V Income Tax, Plot No.1, Subhadra House, S Circle-5, Pune. Nanded Phata, Maharashtra – 411041. Pan: Aavpg0671L Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya – Ca Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Ar Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2024 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 26.10.2023. The Assessee For A.Y.2015-16 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Ao Erred In Making & Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming An Addition Of Rs.30,71,906/- U/S 41(1) Of The Income Tax Act On Account Of Unpaid Sundry Creditors. Namdeo Indarrao Gore [A]

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…le submission in response to notices issued by ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 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…

Govind Milk and Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., Phaltan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

ITA 848/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.848/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Govind Milk & Milk Products The Income Tax Pvt. Ltd., V Officer, Ward-3, Ganesh Sheri, Pune Pandharpur S Satara. Road, At Post Kolki, Phaltan, Satara, Maharashtra. Pan: Aaacg7588A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri R.Y.Balawade – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 13/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26/03/2024 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 25.05.2023. The Assessee For A.Y.2019-20 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Passing Her Order Ex-Parte Without Allowing Appellant Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.43,51,377/- Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Made By The Ld Ao Without Govind Milk & Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 40

…dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. 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…

Anirudha Harihar Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 390/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Anirudha Harihar Mandal 335, New Nandanwan, Nagpur-440009 Pan: Agopm9294J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Smt Veena Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 390/NAG/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Anirudha Harihar Mandal 335, New Nandanwan, Nagpur-440009 PAN: AGOPM9294J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee by : Smt Veena Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Heari…

Fahimuddin Inamdar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Nagpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 241/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Fahimuddin Inamdar 340, Opp. Qidwai Ground, Lashkaribaug, Nagpur-440017 Pan: Aaypi7048E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr R V Loya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By This Appeal The Assessee Impugns The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053135085(1) Dt. 24/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2015-16 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr R V Loya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 241/NAG/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Fahimuddin Inamdar 340, Opp. Qidwai Ground, Lashkaribaug, Nagpur-440017 PAN: AAYPI7048E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr R V Loya [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclus…

Royal Drinks Ptv. Ltd., Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 371/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 371/Pun/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Royal Drinks Pvt. Ltd. 254, Small Factory Area, Wardhaman Nagar, Nagpur-440008 Pan: Aaacr9486J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Rajesh Loya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual hearing from ITAT, Pune) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 371/PUN/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Royal Drinks Pvt. Ltd. 254, Small Factory Area, Wardhaman Nagar, Nagpur-440008 PAN: AAACR9486J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s Income Tax Officer Ward-4(3), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee by : Mr Rajesh Loya [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date…

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2735/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2734/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2733/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Marc Laboratories Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2732/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Mark Laboratories Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2731/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Marc India Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle – 16(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2730/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 30

…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…

Nitin Chawla, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-44(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 728/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…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…

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centreal Circel-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., Nagpur vs. Director of Income Tax, Nagpur

Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, Ahmedabad vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

Lokmangal Cooperative Bank Limited, Solapur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, NFAC Delhi

M/S. Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistnat Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur

Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Pune vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5 Pune, Pune

Govind Milk and Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., Phaltan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

Anirudha Harihar Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

Fahimuddin Inamdar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Nagpur

Royal Drinks Ptv. Ltd., Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3), Nagpur

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Delhi

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(2), New Delhi

Marc Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

Marc Laboratories Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

Mark Laboratories Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi

Marc India Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle – 16(2), New Delhi

Nitin Chawla, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-44(5), New Delhi