“Section 250(6)”

Section References (mined)Section 250Section 250(6)4,093 judgments

THE SIMALIYA DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GODHRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2442/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ananya Kulshresth, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 270ASection 69C

erred in law and on facts in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer ex-parte in violation of the mandate under section 250(6) of the Act, which requires the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal through a reasoned order on each ground of appeal, irrespective

BHAWNA KAPOOR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 632/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarsmt. Bhawna Kapoor Vs. Acit Prop M/S Manish Circle 62(1) Handicraft 1196, Main Delhi Bazar, Paharganj, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk 3853 F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Chander, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69A

P a g e | 1 Bhawna Kapoor (AY 2014-15) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE

KIRAN WATI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 135 days in filing appeal and appeal filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 362/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarsmt. Kiran Wati, Vs. Dcit 2473/13, Goverdhan Central Circle Bihari Colony, Shahdara, Noida New Delhi 110032 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahnpk 8472 A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250(6)

P a g e | 1 Kiran Wati (AY 2011-12) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE

TRAMBAK RAGHUNATH KALE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 30/NAG/2026[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.30/Nag/2026 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Trambak Raghunath Kale, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Congress Nagar, Camp Road, Ward-3, Amravati Amravati-444602, Maharashtra Pan: Bbbpk6461L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.30/NAG/2026

RANJANA DEVI,MAUR MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 410/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjana Devi, C/O Jishu Trading Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Co. Maur Mandi, Punjab. Bathinda. [Pan:-Alzpd4607L] (Appellant) (Respondent) None. Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A

make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision

S.S. INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 817/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 816 & 817/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) S.S. Industries, Plot No.610, 611, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 620, 621, Urla Industrial Area, Village- Tax, Central Circle 1, Raipur, Central Accholi, Distt.-Raipur, C.G.-492003 Revenue Building, Raipur, C. G. Pan: Aclfs9015L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Raghunath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 20/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 69C

before him/her after discussing the issues in detail and his reasons for agreeing with the assessment orders though he, as per provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, is obliged to dispose of the appeal in writing with well-reasoned order on each point of determination arisen ... orders before him, whether or not the issues have been raised by the assessee before him. On cumulative consideration of the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act read with sections 250(4), 250(5), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) of the Act and Explanation of section

S.S. INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 816/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 69C

MOHIT JAIN,INDORE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 844/IND/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Section 144Section 250(6)

grounds/issues raised by assessee in first appeal\nrequires an apt adjudication by CIT(A) on merit in accordance with\nprovisions of Section 250(6) of the Act which provides “The order of the\nCommissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall\nstate the points for determination

S-NET FREIGHT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 22(1), DELHI

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

ITA 3655/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumars-Net Freight (India) Limited, Ito, 301, 3Rd Floor In Aggarwal Ward-22(1), Metro Mall, Plot No.23, Vs. Delhi. Sector-20, Dwarka, Delhi-110075, Pan:Aafcs3703G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tanpreet Singh Kohli, Ca Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Order Dated 12.12.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 30.10. 2017 Of The Ld. Assessing Officer/ Income Tax Officer, Ward- 22(1), New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ao’) For Asst. Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 30.11.2015 Declaring Loss Of Rs.4,98,350/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) Dated 08.04.2016 & Notice 142(1) Along With Detailed S-Net Freight (India) Private Ltd. Vs. Ito

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 250(6)Section 72

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

VINEET KUMAR,DHARAMSHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHARMSHALA

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

ITA 1090/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69A

LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record ... dismissed the appeal without properly adjudicating upon the contentions raised by the assessee and without passing a speaking order as mandated under section 250(6) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to frame proper points for determination and has not dealt with the submissions and evidences

TULAJABHAVANI MAHILA GRA SAH PATH SANSTA MARY.,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 192/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.192/Pun/2026 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Tulajabhavani Mahila Gra Sah Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pathsansta Mary Ward-1(1), Kolhapur Kodoli, At Post Kodoli, Tal. Panhala, Kolhapur-416114 Maharashtra Pan : Aabat4234H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.192/PUN/2026

PRAVEEN SANJIV,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-7(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3834/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3834/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Praveen Sanjiv, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 45, W Block, 7Th Street, Anna Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Nagar, Chennai 600 040. Chennai. [Pan: Fzzps0216R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.12.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Ground No. 1 Raised By The Assessee Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

vehemently argued that merely remanding to the file of the Assessing Officer without deciding the issue on merits violates the appellate obligation under section 250(6) of the Act. Further, he submits that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC failed to adjudicate the legal issue that no income arises under section ... Officer for fresh consideration as rightly pointed out by the ld. AR, without deciding the issue on merits violates the appellate obligation under section 250(6) of the Act. We note that the assessee purchased two immovable properties at Neelankarai, Chennai under registered document vide Nos. 1998/2015 on different dates

NIDEC MOBILITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON, INDIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL), CENTRAL NER, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

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

ITA 3616/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sourav Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 92C

appeal on merits. The ld. CIT(A) is required and obligated to pass appellate order in compliance with the provisions of section 250(6), as ld. CIT(A) is required to pass reasoned and speaking order on merits in accordance with law. Reference is drawn to provisions of Section 250 ... adjudicating issues arising in the appeal on merits , such order is not sustainable in the eyes of law keeping in view provisions of Section 250(6) , and also higher appellate authorities will be deprived to see what weighed in the mind of the ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating appeal

VICKY AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS & SUPPLIERS PVT LTD,,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD-8(3)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 9158/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarvicky Agro Food Ito-8(3)(3), Products & Suppliers Room No. 616, 6Th Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 125/129, Central M. K. Road, Warehousing Churchgate, Mumbai- Corporation Building 400020 Reay Road (East), Mumbai-400 033 Pan/Gir No. Aadcv3351K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Kiran Mehta, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Nayanjyoti Nath, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

without examining the earlier correspondence and without providing adequate opportunity to cure the alleged defect, is not in consonance with the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act which requires the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned order stating the points for determination

PRATIK RAVJIBHAI KACHAROLA,MORBI vs. ITO, WARD-1, MORBI, MORBI

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

ITA 692/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 692/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) Pratik Ravjibhai Kacharola Vs. The Ito, Ward – 1 4-Anumpam Society, B/H. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Akshardham Apartment, Ring Road, Rajkot – 360001 Ravapar Road, Morbi - 363641 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bwrpk4078C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: 18/02/2026

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. DINESH MOHAN

BINOD BARUAH,TINSUKIA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

ITA 433/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Section 250(6)

passed an ex-parte order in limine without deciding the issues at merit, which in our opinion is in violation of Provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned

KAILASH JALAN,TINSUKIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, DIBRUGARH, DIBRUGARH

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

ITA 383/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Section 250(6)

SINGDON RONGHANG,ASSAM vs. ITO WARD 2, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

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

ITA 361/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Singdon Ronghang Ito Ward, 2, Dimapur Tuliram Ronghang Rongtheang, Dimapur-797103, Karbianglong, Diphu-782460, Vs. Nagaland Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Cdppr0948Q Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dipak Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.03.2026

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dipak Singh, DR

Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

point of determination and his decision thereon and the reason for taking the said decision as mandated by the provision of section 250(6) of the Act which apparently has not been done by the appellate authority. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 939/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A'sFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ “ए”, चण्डीगढ़\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH\nHEARING

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

ITA 1146/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Showing 1–20 of 4,093 · Page 1 of 205

...