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 367,154 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)

Dharmendra Vaishnav, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward, Phalodi

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

ITA 162/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Laxman Singh Gurjar, Sr. DR

Section 246

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR (VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 162/Jodh/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Dharmendra Vaishnav Vs. Income Tax Officer, S/o Devi Kishan Jaloda, Ward, Phalodi Phalodi, Distt. Jodhpur Phalodi [PAN: ALFPV 8327H] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Laxman Singh Gurjar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.11.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 07.12.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee…

Zulfikar Kasam Momin, Mumbai vs. ITO-31(3)(5), Mumbai

ITA 2084/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Zeal SavlaFor Respondent: Shri Ajudiya Manish

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…A) was justified in dismissing the appeal. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material 7. on record. 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 rather than dismiss the same on account of non-prosecution. Therefore…

Salasar Warehousing Private Limited, Pune vs. Inocme Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Pune

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

ITA 59/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Nov 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryand Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.59/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Salasar Warehousing Private The Income Tax Officer, Limited, V Ward-6(1), Pune. F-2,Warehouse, Sr.No.20/2A, S Near Mundhwa Bridge, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aamcs4834C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarvesh Kandelwal – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 27/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/11/2023

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 43B

…n each liability separately by passing the speaking order. However, the ld.CIT(A) has not done the same. The Hon'ble Bombay High Courtin the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar 3 Salasar Warehousing Private Limited [A] 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…

Inducto Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 3 (2) (1), Mumbai

ITA 2590/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Yash KakadiyaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…ssued during the appellate proceedings and therefore, the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal. 3 We note that in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), 7. 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 rather than dismiss the same on account of non-prosecution. Therefore…

The Indian Missionary Movement, Kawardha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Kawardha, Kawardha

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

ITA 199/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 199/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year:2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay Jain & R.B. Doshi, CA’sFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 253(5)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM (ITA No. 199/RPR/2022) (Assessment Year:2017-18) The Indian Missionary Movement V Income Tax Office, Gali No. 1, Kawardha, Kabirdham s Ward-Kawardha, Kawardha 491995, Chhattisgarh, India PAN: AACTT1939M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Tanmay Jain & R.B. Doshi, CA’s राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date…

M/S. Png Brothers, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12, Pune

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

ITA 1153/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1153/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Png Brothers, The Dcit, 591, Sadashiv Peth, Laxmi V Circle-12, Pune. Road, Pune – 411030. S Pan: Aadfp5196K Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri M.R.Bhagwat – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 22/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/11/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 15.09.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.12.2019 For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Ld.Authorised Representative(Ld.Ar) For The Assessee Submitted That Assessee’S Appeal Was Dismissed By The Ld.Cit(A) M/S.Png Brothers [A]

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

…erved that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without discussing merits, as assessee failed to file submission in response to various notices. 4.1 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…

Hillway Sadhna Co Op Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

ITA 2675/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K Shivram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Joginder Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)(d)

…elied upon the following decisions;- i) CIT v/s Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria, [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC); ii) Biswaranjan Bysack v/s CIT, 1967] 66 ITR 452 (SC); (ii) CIT v/s Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), ITA no.2336 of 2013, dated 25.04.2016; [2017] 297 CTR 614 and v) M. Loganathan v/s ITO, [2013] 350 ITR 373 (Mad.). 8. The learned Departmental Representative submitted, since the assessee filed a letter seeking withdrawal of appeal, it was not necessary for the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merit. 9. I have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. I have al…

Jitenderpal Singh Ahluwalia, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 247/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 247/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jitenderpal Singh Ahluwalia Opp. Prince Sanitation, Station Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Ackpa2664C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: S/shri Sakshi Gopal Aggrawal &For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…andate 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 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 t…

Shree Ravalnath Cooperative Housing Finance Society Ltd, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Kolhapur

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

ITA 992/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.992/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shree Ravalnath Cooperative The Income Tax Housing Finance Society Ltd., V Officer, Ward-1(1), 18, Doctors Colony At S Kolhapur. Gandhiglaj, Kolhapur – 416502. Pan: Aacas 0340 N Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 12/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)[Nfac], Pune Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.07.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 23.02.2021 For The A.Y.2018-19. Shree Ravalnath Cooperative Housing Finance Society Ltd., [A]

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

…horities. 4. On perusal of the order of the ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] it is observed that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without discussing merits. 4.1 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…

Mrs Varsha Kaushik Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT Ward 15(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2304/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2304/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Mrs. Varsha Kaushik Shah Acit, Ward 15(1) बिधम/ 5, Bhaveshwar Vihar Ii, Room No.451/480, Vs. 383, S. V. P Road, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 400004. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Avzps7401F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Simoni Chouhan/Rashmi Vyas Revenue By: Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Simoni Chouhan/RashmiFor Respondent: Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan (Sr

Section 250

…the assessee was served the copy of notice but did not appear before the Ld.CIT(A), the appeal was required to be disposed off on merits as already ordered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF reported in (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.), Moreover, it was brought to our notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the impugned order in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). i.e. Ld.NFAC has not decided the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in accordance to section 250 (b) of the Act. In such a factual back drop…

U S Roofs Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2111/MUM/2023[2005-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2005-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 V. M/S.U.S.Roofs Ltd., The Ito-10(3), 115/116, Jk Chambers, Mumbai. Sec-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703. [Pan: Aaacu 3633 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Respondent By : Shri Vithal Machindra Bhosale, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhattFor Respondent: Shri Vithal Machindra Bhosale, Sr.DR

Section 250(6)Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

…the assessee was served the copy of notice but did not appear before the Ld.CIT(A), the appeal was required to be disposed off on merits as already ordered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF reported in (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.), wherein, it was observed as under: “1. This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 9th May, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2006-07. AY.2005-06 M/s. U. S. Roofs Ltd :: 3 :: 2. This appeal raises the fol…

Sanjay Grain Products(P) Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 293/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 293/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sanjay Grain Products (P) Ltd. 34-35, Adishwar Complex, Ram Nagar Para, Raipur-492 001 Pan : Aadcs5038G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Virat Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

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

…ndate 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…

Lalchand Ramnani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(3), Raipur

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

ITA 288/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 288/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Lalchand Ramnani New Cloth Market, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acnpr3983J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 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 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 t…

Smt. Soni Jha, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my observations above

ITA 118/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 118/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Soni Jha 11, 557, Om Shanti Nagar, Pt. Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Naya Talab, Gadhiyari, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Arcpj5940M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekass S. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N. C Roy, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…10 Smt. Soni Jha Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur 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 same…

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 95/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

…he above, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed.” 3. 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…

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 94/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 93/NAG/2021[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2012-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 92/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2112/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.2102, 2103, 2104, 2105 & 2112/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2006-07 M/s.U.S.Roofs Ltd., v. The Addl./Jt./Dy./Asst. CIT/ITO, 115/116, J.K.Chambers, National e-Assessment Centre, Sec-17, Vashi, Navi Delhi. Mumbai. [PAN: AAACU 3633 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Fenil Bhat, AR Respondent by : Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: At the very o…

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2105/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250