“Section 250(2)(a)”

MANGAL COMPUSOLUTION LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1) 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

effectively pursuing it and if a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray.” Section 250(2)(a) reads as under:- 5 ITA 5172/Mum/2025 Mangal Compusolution Ltd “250 (1) The Appellate Assistant Commissioner shall fix a day and place for the hearing

M/S D B INFRATECH,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMM OF INCOME TAX RANGE 32(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Tribunal Be Condoned & The Impugned Order Passed By The Cit(A) Be Set Aside Since The Cit(A) Had Dismissed The Appeal Without Examining The Merits Granting One More Opportunity To The Appellant To Make Out His Case Before The Cit(A) On Merits. Explain The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal, The Learned Authorised Representative For The Assessee Submitted That The Delay Was Caused On Account Of Inadvertent Mistake Committed By The Employee Of The Company Who Was Tasked With The Job Of Keeping Track Of The Appellate Proceedings Before The Cit(A) & Was Asked To Arrange For Filing Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A).

required to deal with the issue raised by the Assessee on merits in view of the provisions contained in Section 250(2)(a) and 250(6) of the Act. Thus, we find merit in Assessee’s plea of restoring the issues raised back to the file

PERVEZ KHODAYAR RAISI,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 19(2), MUMBAI, TARDEO, GRANT ROAD (W), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose in above terms

explained which shows that the non compliance was neither\nintentional nor malafide on behalf of the appellant/assessee.\n20. Let us examine provisions of Section 250(2) of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 to find out if lower authority i.e., CIT(A) has complied the said\nprovision or not. :\n\"(2 ... heard at the\nhearing of the appeal in sine qua non for the adjudication and decision\nof the appeal. As per section 250(2)(A), the appellant/assessee either in\nperson or by authorized representative shall have the right to be heard at\nthe hearing of the appeal.\n22. Admittedly

MARVEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(2),, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1486/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Marvel Industries Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-2(2)(2) 20 Podar Chambers, Sa Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Brelvi Road, Bombay, Mumbai. Mumbai-400023. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm3243J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Haridas Bhat Revenue By: Shri Chetan M. Kacha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: By Preferring This Appeal, The Assessee/Appellant Has Challenged The Impugned Action Of The Ld. Cit(A)/ Nfac, Delhi Passed On 28Th March 2022. It Was Brought To Our Notice That The Cit(A) Has Passed An Ex-Parte Order Without Considering The Merits Of The Action Of Ao By Observing As Follows: “5. During The Course Of Appellate Proceedings, Notice For Hearing Was Issued To Appellant On 09.08.2019, 18.10.2019, 22.12.2021 & 03.03.2022. All These Notices Were Issued Through Itba System Via E- Mail Id Provided In The Itba Portal. In Response, Appellant Failed To File Any Submission In Support Of The Grounds Raised By Him Nor Did Appellant Seek For Any Adjournment. 6. It Is Clear From The Above That Appellant Has Been Granted Opportunities To Represent Its Case In The Appellate Proceedings But Has Failed To Make Any Submissions In Support Of The Grounds Of Appeal Filed By Appellant. Appellant Is Not Interested In Prosecuting The Appeal

extracted above, do raise specific “points for determination” calling for adjudication by the learned CIT(A). While an assessee indeed has, under section 250(2)(a), “the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal”, such a right of the assessee-appellant cannot be put against the assessee ... right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal” by “the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative condition”, under section 250(2)(a), is not a condition precedent for the disposal of appeal on merits in accordance with the scheme of Section 250

TUNISHA DIGANT KAPADIA,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

extracted above, do raise specific “points for determination” calling for adjudication by the learned CIT(A). While an assessee indeed has, under section 250(2)(a), “the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal”, such a right of the assessee-appellant cannot be put against the assessee ... right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal” by “the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative condition”, under section 250(2)(a), is not a condition precedent for the disposal of appeal on merits in accordance with the scheme of Section 250

MARVEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(2) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

extracted above, do raise specific “points for determination” calling for adjudication by the learned CIT(A). While an assessee indeed has, under section 250(2)(a), “the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal”, such a right of the assessee-appellant cannot be put against the assessee ... right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal” by “the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative condition”, under section 250(2)(a), is not a condition precedent for the disposal of appeal on merits in accordance with the scheme of Section 250