“Section 250(6)”

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

The decision most relied on for Section 250(6) is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 250(6)

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT

2,267

citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT

223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court

2,040

citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another

118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court

1,656

citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

297 CTR 614 · 2017 · High Court

659

citing judgments

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.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court

451

citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

372 ITR 619 · 2015 · High Court

391

citing judgments

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT

296 ITR 495 · 2008 · High Court

351

citing judgments

The High Court can return a reference unanswered if the assessee fails to appear or provide assistance. This illustrates the broader principle that appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution when a party does not effectively pursue their case.

Inder Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2025 INSC 382 · 2025 · Supreme Court

267

citing judgments

Non-deliberate procedural delays caused by circumstances beyond control must be condoned in the interest of substantial justice, even if the delay is significant, such as over 1500 days.

Judgments citing Section 250(6)

Nana Aatmaramsa Ujwane, Akola vs. ITO Ward-3, Akola

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

ITA 586/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.586/NAG./2024

Ashish Tarunkumar Doshi, Yavatmal vs. ITO Ward-1, Yavatamal

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

ITA 585/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Gandhi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN

Priyanka Nitin Chandawar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Chandrapur

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

ITA 574/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN

Salim Shah Ali, Agra vs. ITO Ward 2 (1) (4), Agra

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 197/AGR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: None(Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant

Renu Sharma Vikram Singh, Aligarh vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Aligarh

ITA 791/AGR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Gargh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant

Santaji Cooperative Society Maryadit, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward-3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 597/NAG/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.597/NAG./2024

Nkt Tanstructural, Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 44/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mahadev Vichare, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.44/NAG./2024

Shri Radhika Prakashan Raipur Private Limited, Bhopal (M.P.) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 320/IND/2023[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Indore03 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2007-08 Shri Radhika Prakashan Acit Raipur, Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal 26 A Press Complex Zone I बनाम/ M.P. Nagar Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Aahcs9575N Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2025

Section 154Section 250(6)

case from all angles including the legality objection of assessee after considering record of AO and pass an apt order in terms of section 250(6). Accordingly, this matter is remanded back to CIT(A). The Page 2 of 3 Radhika Prakashan Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 320/Ind/2023

Rekha Singh, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 844/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Artham Rajesh, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, SR-DR

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 69A

findings. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is not in accordance with the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A). We also found that the case of the assessee could

Mani Munjal, Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Durgapur

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

ITA 1686/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1686/Kol/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mani Munjal, V/S Ito, Ward-1(2), B-110 Sargam Sarani, Durgapur Sector – 2C, Bidhan Nagar, West Bengal-713212 Pan : Azkpm0635J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

issues. It is the settled mandate of law that ld.CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal in terms of provision of section 250(6) of the Act framing the points for determination by passing a speaking order along with the reasons for arriving at such decision. In this

Natasha Chopra, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2293/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Sh. Akshat Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sudeep Dabas, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon

Bhim Sah, Patna vs. ITO, Patna

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 674/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.673&674/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Bhim Sah.…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Kumhar Toli, Near Mahavir, Kankerbagh Main Road, Patna, Bihar- 800020. [Pan: Amhps2682M] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(2), Patna……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shailendra Sinha, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit - Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 29, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 07.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Submitted That There Is A Delay Of 232 Days In Filing Both The Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed Applications For Condonation Of Delay Citing Valid & Proper Reasons. After Considering The Averments Made In The Applications, We Condone The Delay In Both The Appeals. 3. First, We Take Up The Issue In Respect Of Ita No.673/Pat/2022 For Assessment Year 2015-16. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of

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

order of the ld. CIT(A) was passed without addressing the merit of the case which is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, deem it fit to remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction

Bhim Sah, Patna vs. ITO, Patna

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 673/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

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

Manish Kumar Prasad, Patna vs. Dc/Ac, Cir-5, Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 477/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.477/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Manish Kumar Prasad…………….....…..…………………....Appellant Prop. Laxmi International, Purushottam Plaza, Makhania Kuan, Patna, Bihar- 800004. [Pan: Bgppk2783L] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-5, Patna….……….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 54 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause For Such Delay. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case.

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Sangeeta Devi, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 433/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.433/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sangeeta Devi…………………….....…..…………………....Appellant C/O Sri Sachidanand Prasad, Mohanpur, Punpun, Patna, Bihar-804453. [Pan: Ctmpd6717N] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Patna….….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. No One Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of Serving Consecutive Notices Of Hearing & The Tribunal Cannot Keep This Appeal Pending For Indefinite Time Due To Non-Representation. Therefore, In The Absence Of Any Authorised Representative Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Decide The Appeal With The Help Of Ld. Dr & Also Considering The Material Available On Record. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2016-17, The Assessing Officer Noticed That Certain

Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Murari Prasad Khatri, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 359/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.359/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Murari Prasad Khatri………….....…..…………………....Appellant Dadarmandi, G. Bagh, Patnacity, Bihar-800007. [Pan: Attpk3693B] Vs. Ito, Ward-5(2), Patna….….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rakesh Verma, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.11.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jaipur [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Care Are That In The Case Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2017-18, Assessment Order Was Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Vide Order Dated 14.12.2019 By Making Addition Of Rs.10,78,500/- By Treating The Same As Unexplained Income U/S 69 R.W.S 115Bbe Of The Act. 3. Dissatisfied With The Above Order, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). Despite Receiving Three Consecutive Notices, The Assessee Failed To Appear Or Present His Case. The Appeal Of The

Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Amarkant Mishra, Samastipur vs. ITO, Ward-3 (3), Samastipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 81/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.81/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amarkant Mishra…………………..…..…………………....Appellant Shyam Narayan Mishra Khrihara Sarai Ranjan, Bihar - 848132 [Pan: Aqlpm0409N] Vs. Nfac, Delhi………………….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri K N Prasad, Adv. & Vishal Kr. Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.07.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,90,090/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Followed By Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Asking The Assessee To File Various Details. The Assessing Officer On The Basis Of Material Available On Record Noticed That The Assessee Has Claimed Expenditure Of Rs.70,23,840/-. Due To Failure Of The Assessee To Produce Any Documentary Evidence In Support Of His Claim, The Assessing Officer Disallowed 10% Of The Expentiure To The Extent Of Rs.7,02,384/- & Added The Same To The Total Income Of

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Balusingh Kirar, Rajgarh vs. National Faceless Assesment Center, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 491/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2018-19 Balu Singh Kirar Nfac S/O Dariyav Singh Delhi Tapriyahedi बनाम/ Kharpa Zirapur Vs. Rajgarh (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Gukps7110D Assessee By Shri Chandresh Singhvi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.01.2025

Section 147Section 250(6)Section 253(5)Section 69C

passed ex-parte order for non-prosecution of appeal by assessee without making adjudication in terms of mandate of section 250(6). Further, the AO’s order is also ex-parte for non-compliances of notices. But the AO has made a hefty addition

Ashish Goyal HUF, Neemuch vs. Income-Tax Officer, Neemuch

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 387/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253(5)

decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeals and proceed with hearing. 3. Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points ... orders, although due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing but still without complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first appeal-orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserve to be set aside and these matters are fit for restoring

Ashish Goyal HUF, Neemuch vs. Income -Tax Officer, Neemuch

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 386/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253(5)