← All Phrases

“Section 249(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 249Section 249(1)16 judgments

DILIP VENGSARKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEPMTION) 1(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7791/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokardilip Vengsarkar Ito(Exemption)- Foundation 1(2), A-5, Sportsfield, 9A Khan Vs. Room No. 620, 6Th Abdul Gaffar Khan Road, Floor, Cumball Hill Worli Colony, Worli, Mtnl Telephone Mumbai-400 030 Exchange Building, Pedder Road, Dr. G. S. Marg, Mumbai-400 026 Pan/Gir No. Aaatd1346G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nikhil Damle & Shri Himmat Rajput, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.02.2026

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

therefore, the appeal was held to be defective and not maintainable in view of section 249(4) of the Act. 10. Section 249(1) read with section 249(4) and Rules framed thereunder, mandates that an appeal shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee and that proof of payment

NISHTHA VINCOM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(3), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1160/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

that the appeal suffers from non-compliance with the mandatory requirements prescribed under Rule 45(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 and Section 249(1) of the Act, due to the non-availability of Form No. 35 on the portal. 3.2 It is important to mention here that every ... appeal under Chapter-XX shall be filed in the prescribed form and shall be verified in prescribed manner as mandated in Section 249(1) of the Act. 3.3 As per Rule 45(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) must be filed electronically

SH. IRSHAD ILAHI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W- 1(3), DEHRADUN

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

ITA 80/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15 Irshad Ilahi, Income Tax Officer, 96 Colli Camp, Turner Road, Ward-1(3), Clement Town, Dehradun, Vs Dehradun Uttarkhand-248001 Pan-Acmpi0814J Appellant Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 250

phone number registered on the Aadhar Card. 5. That the Appellant also paid the Appeal Fees of Rs. 1000 in terms of Section 249(1)(iii) on 24.1.2018 (i.e. within 30 days of service of Notice of Demand) but since her Mobile Number was not linked to the Aadhar Card

SAMEEKSHA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as being not maintainable

ITA 816/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 816/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-14) M/S. Sameeksha Trust V/S. Ito(Exemptions)-2(1), 320/321, A-Z Industrial बिधम Mumbai Estate, G.K. Marg, Lower 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill, Parel, Mumbai-400013 Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaats0581L Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal & Shri MandarFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Afaqui
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 249(1)Section 250

extended by Circular No. 20 dated 26.05.2016 which was not complied with, the manual appeal filed is not admissible as per provisions of Section 249(1) of the Act. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed as the same is not maintainable. As a result, the manual appeal is treated as dismissed

MEDICURE CHEMIST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -41(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1919/MUM/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pratik JainFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

CBDT circular No. 20/2016, dated 26.05.2016 as well as Notification No .S.O. 637(E) [No.11/2016 (F.No.149/150/2015-TPL)], dated 01.03.2016 r.w. provisions of section 249(1) of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) held the appeal as not maintainable and invalid ab initio. However, while dismissing the said appeal filed manually

MS UNIQUE LIVING HOMES PVT LTD (NOW KNOWN AS UNIQUE LIVING HOMES LLP),JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 438/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 249(1)Section 295

Notification No. S.O. 637(E) dated March 01, 2016, of the CBDT, New Delhi issued in exercise of the powers conferred by section 249(1), read with section 295 of the Act. The Income-tax (3rd Amendment) Rules, 2016, amended rule 45 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, mandating compulsory

MR MADAN MOHAN MISHRA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 10(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals for AY 2013-14 & 2014-15 of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4162/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 249(1)

time of appellate proceedings arising out of e-filed appeal. However, the manual appeal filed is not admissible as per provisions of Section 249(1) of the Act. Hence, this appeal is treated as not maintainable and invalid abinito.” 4. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has e-filed

MR MADAN MOHAN MISHRA,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 10(3)(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals for AY 2013-14 & 2014-15 of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4161/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 249(1)

time of appellate proceedings arising out of e-filed appeal. However, the manual appeal filed is not admissible as per provisions of Section 249(1) of the Act. Hence, this appeal is treated as not maintainable and invalid abinito.” 4. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has e-filed

KADVA PATIDAR BETALIS SAMAJ MANAV SEVA SAMITI TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal field by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1132/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 249(1)Section 271(1)(c)

NFAC is also given liberty to rise the appeal fees paid by the assessee is within the provisions of Section 249(1) of the Act. 5. In the result, the appeal field by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court

JITENDRA AMARLAL NAGPAL,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2389/MUM/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blejitendra Amarlal Nagpal V. Ito – Central Circle – 8(4) 396, Swan Lake, 14Th Road Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Khar (W), Mumbai – 400052 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaapn7150J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 249(1)

substantiate his claim, as elaborated above, the present appeal is held to be non-maintainable and invalid in terms of the provisions of section 249(1) of the Act and the same is dismissed in limine without any discussion on merits or any other aspects”. Considering the totality of facts

VIKASH CHAUDHARY,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 2(5), NOIDA

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

ITA 1821/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Anil Kumar Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(1)Section 249(1)(a)Section 69

That the Ld. CIT(A) is legally wrong and against the facts of the case on alleged non compliance of requirement of Section 249(1] (a) and 249 (4) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3 VIKASH CHAUDHARY VS. ITO 7. That the assessee reserves it's right ... Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 30/08/2018 dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not complied with the requirement of “Section 249 (1)(a)” of the Act in paying the fees for preferring the appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred

R.P. ASSOCIATES,NOIDA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-3, NOIDA

In the result appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 888/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249(1)(a)Section 250Section 40

para no. 9 observed that the appeal by the appellant cannot be admitted without payment of necessary fee in terms of provisions of section 249(1)(a) of I.T. Act, 1961. The appellant has brought no evidence on record that it has deposited the necessary fee to the credit

MINAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) CIR-10(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, present appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 597/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Kiran MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali
Section 249(1)Section 250

asked to explain as to why the aforesaid appeal filed by him manually should not be treated as invalid, ab initio as per Section 249(1) and his written response was asked to be submitted within 7 days for the receipt of this letter. In response ... time of appellate proceedings arising out of e-filed appeal. However, the manual appeal filed is not admissible as per provisions of Section 249(1) of the Act. Hence, this appeal is treated as not maintainable and invalid abinito.” Minal Industries Ltd. ITA No.597/Mum./2022 5. During the course

MANISH KUMAR GUPTA,NOIDA vs. DCIT , CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

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

ITA 1795/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Divyansh Jain, CAFor Respondent: adjournment application
Section 143(3)Section 249(1)(a)

however passed cryptic order wherein the appeal was not admitted alleging non compliance with the requirement of Section 249(1)(a) of the Act and held that appeal of the assessee is not maintainable. 5. Further aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee ... assessee was neither discussed on merit nor the principles of natural justice has been followed. The non compliance of requirement of Section 249(1)(a) was alleged without verifying the relevant fact. It was thus contended that the disposal of the appeal by the CIT(A) was in infringement

PRAGYA MUDGAL,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD - 2(4), NOIDA

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

ITA 1503/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2010-11 Pragya Mudgal, Vs Ito, Tower-B6, Flat No.-G-003, Ward-2(4), Noida. Gardenia Glory, Sector-46, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301. Pan-Amppm6663A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Pragya Mudgal, Assessee Respondent By Sh.Gaurav Pundir, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2021

Section 147Section 249(1)(a)Section 250(6)

appeal of the assessee on the ground that the appeal cannot be admitted without payment of necessary fee in terms of provision of section 249(1)(a) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred present appeal before this Tribunal. 2 | P a g e 5. The assessee

MANISH PENGORIYA,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD-2(2), NOIDA

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

ITA 2513/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 249(1)(a)Section 250

admitted the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-filing of challan of fee as required under section 249(1)(a) of the Act. Before us, the learned Counsel of the assessee, however, has filed copy of the challan of fee dated 27/01/2018. In view of fee already ... deposited, the assessee cannot be treated in default of section 249(1)(a) of the Act. In view of these facts and circumstances, we set aside the order of the Learned CIT(A) and restore the matter back to him for verification of the copy of challan fee with Income

Section 249(1) — 16 judgments | BharatTax | BharatTax