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)

Associated Cement Products, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 612/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Bahri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)

…issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A). 3 ITA.No.612/NAG/2025 (Associated Cement Products) Considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay) [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bom.) that Ld.CIT(A)/ NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits, even in an ex-parte order, I hereby direct the Ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate all the issues raised in the instant appeal by way of passing speaking order after duly considering the details filed by the assessee as well as settled judicial precedents as contemplated u/s. 250(6) o…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 29/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 28/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 27/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 26/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 25/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 24/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 23/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 21/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Rajmal Jain, Bastar, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

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

ITA 20/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

…by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). That further, as per the dictate of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had clearly laid out the judicial principles that the appellate authority shall have to adjudicate every grounds of appeal on merits. 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), the…

Narottam Atmaram Warde, Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer, Panvel

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

ITA 3139/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3139/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Narottam Atmaram Warde, V The Income Tax Koproli, Saral, Alibag, Dist- S Officer, Raigad – 402209. Panvel. Pan: Abypw5023A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Ronak Jain Revenue By Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09/02/2026 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 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 Dated 08.08.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The I.T.Act, Dated 13.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Leamed Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Interpreting Law & Facts In Dismissing The Appeal For Non-Prosecution

Section 144Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 250(6)

…t adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised by Assessee. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 10. 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…

Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 2935/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripote

Section 250

…all/ any of the grounds of appeal and lead evidence/additional evidences. 5.1 However, ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated these grounds. 6. 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…

Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 2930/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripote

Section 250

…all/ any of the grounds of appeal and lead evidence/additional evidences. 5.1 However, ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated these grounds. 6. 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…

Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke, Pune vs. DCIT Cir-5, Pune

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

ITA 3024/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3024/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5, Flat No.803, Building C, Pune Treasure Park, Santnagar, Parvati, Parvatigaon, Pune 411009, Maharashtra Pan : Acdpb2796F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P BoraFor Respondent: Date of hearing

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

…and after considering the submissions/evidences to be filed by the assessee shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the 3 Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds rais…

The Officers Recreation Club, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bapatla

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

ITA 734/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Section 69A

…dismissal simplicitor due to non-compliance on the part of assessee. 5. Before ITAT, Ld.AR of appellant has stated that the appeal order of Ld.CIT(A) is invalid in the eyes of law in view of Hon’ble Bombay High Court’s decision of Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (297 CTR 614), where it was held that CIT(A) does not have the 3 The Officers Recreation Club power to dismiss the appeal due to non-compliance of hearing notices by assessee and CIT(A) has to adjudicate on the merits of the case also when certain grounds of appeal are raised on merits/issues. It was also submitted by Ld.AR of appellant that the main Office…

Jitendra Nanasaheb Thorat, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Nashik

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

ITA 2307/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2307/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Jitendra Nanasaheb Thorat, V Income Tax Officer, A-7, Chaitrapalavi Apartment, S Ward-2(4), Nashik. Ashok Marg, Near Bank Of Maharashtra, Behind Fame Cinema, Nashik – 422006. Pan: Afypt8886Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Through Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meema –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2026 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 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2011-12 Dated 28.07.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act, Dated 27.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

…grounds of appeal raised by Assessee which includes legal ground also. It is mandatory for ld.CIT(A) to decide the grounds on merit. 7. 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 4 ITA No.2307/PUN/2025 [A] Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as…

Santosh Hanumant Salke, Kudalwadi, Chikhli vs. Ward 9(3), Pune, Akurdi

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

ITA 3361/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3361/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri J. G. BhumkarFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)

…and after considering the submissions/evidences to be filed by the assessee shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless 4 Santosh Hanumant Salke otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised…

Balu Vithal Pawale, Pune vs. ITO WD- 2(4), Pune

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

ITA 2869/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2869/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balu Vithal Pawale, V Assessing Officer, Village-Kasarsai, S National Faceless Taluka-Mulsi, Assessment Centre, Dist-Pune – 410506. Delhi Pan:Bfcpp7170L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 08/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 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 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 27.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 144BSection 147rSection 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits. 5. 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…

Mumtaz Ali Mohd, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1260/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1260/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Mumtaz Ali Mohd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-8(1), Pan: Abppm6593E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vonoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 09/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 09/01/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 12/05/2023 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Vonoth Kannan

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

…ssment was assailed by the assessee and ought not to have summarily dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Our 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). The Hon’ble High Court in the aforementioned case had observed as under: 10 Mumtaz Ali Mohd vs. ITO "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…

Ravindra Babanrao Kasar, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-7(3), Pune

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

ITA 2634/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2634/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare

Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…mit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to 3 Ravindra Babanr…

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)

Associated Cement Products, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Nagpur

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Rajmal Jain, Bastar, Narayanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanker

Narottam Atmaram Warde, Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer, Panvel

Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Aurangabad

Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Aurangabad

Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke, Pune vs. DCIT Cir-5, Pune

The Officers Recreation Club, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bapatla

Jitendra Nanasaheb Thorat, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Nashik

Santosh Hanumant Salke, Kudalwadi, Chikhli vs. Ward 9(3), Pune, Akurdi

Balu Vithal Pawale, Pune vs. ITO WD- 2(4), Pune

Mumtaz Ali Mohd, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

Ravindra Babanrao Kasar, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-7(3), Pune