← All Phrases

“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)

Prakash Ramchandra Katkar, Ratnagiri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ratnagiri

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 244/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Anupkumar Rathi, Nagrpur vs. Centralized Processing Center, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 70/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH

Rekha Vijay Ugale, Dhamangaon Railway vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5, Amravati

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 61/NAG/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JakhotaiFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Chandrakala Shivmangal Dubey, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2) Nagpur, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 411/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250(6)Section 54

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH

Westline Trading Company Private Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT Circle 4, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 391/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Amol Devidas Wagh, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward3(5) Nagpur, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 313/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Arun Laxmanrao Khandekar, Nagpur vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 302/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nitin KhadatkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Ms Shree Keshaorao Dillusao Nashine Country Liqour Shop, Gondia vs. ITO, Ward-1, Gondia

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 292/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Panchamlal Gaur, Nagpur vs. ITO, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 270/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Shobha Rajendra Somani, Washim vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward -3, Akola

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 232/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mundra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :NAGPUR [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No

Naresh Pukhraj Sharma, Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Amravati

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 97/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH

Fattesing Punaji Dhabre, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 82/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: CA AsliyaRozaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Fattesing Punaji Dhabre, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 81/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: CA AsliyaRozaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Ashok Nandlal Mundhada, Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 - Amravati

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 197/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Nikhil Inderchand Jain, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3), Nagpur

ITA 121/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

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

Vinod Sabhapati Pandey, Chandrapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Nagpur

ITA 111/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.111/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vinod Sabhapati Pandet, The Income Tax Officer, C/O. Chadda Transport, Ward V Ward-4, Chandrapur. No.05, Manikgarh Cement S Rd, Bakhardi, Gadhchandur, Chandrapur – 442908. Pan: Bgppp8723F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Agrawal – Adv.(Ar) Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2013-14 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Vinod Sabhapati Pandet [A]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 44A

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

Apeak Infotech Private Liminted, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur

ITA 103/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.103/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Apeak Infotech Private The Assistant Limited, V Commissioner Of Income Room No.3, Ground Floor, S Tax, Plot No.101, East High Court Circle-4, Nagpur. Road, New Ramdas Peth, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Aafca5453R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Hitesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Apeak Infotech Private Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

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

Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd, Lucknow vs. ACIT Reang-1, Lucknow

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

ITA 19/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. V. The Assistant 761, Village – Anaura Commissioner Of Near Indira Canal Income Tax Faizabad Road, Lucknow Range-I, Lucknow Pan:Aabap6918L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18 04 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 04 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR
Section 43C

decided the appeal after discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. 8. As per provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the Commissioner (Appeals) was obliged to dispose of the appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and to then pass an order ... such orders or vary it so as to either to enhance or to reduce the penalty. On cumulative consideration of the provisions of section 250(6) read with sections 250(4), 250(5), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2), it is concluded that

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune, Swargate vs. Grupo Antolin India Private Limited, Pune

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1118/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1118/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Dhanraj Dangi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Akhilesh Srivastava [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)Section 250Section 253(2)Section 92C

required to state point of determination, its decision thereon and clear reasons therefore in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. This exercise by the Ld. CIT(A) is a pre-requisite and invariably necessary for each assessment year in each case irrespective repetition. This is because in taxation ... date of impugned order, without burdening the appellant to reproduce/resubmit evidences on the subject matter and pass a speaking order in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. Ordered accordingly. 9. In result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Hbs Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3949/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailhbs Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of 505 Ceejay House, Dr. Income Tax- 7(1)(2) Annie Besant Road, Worli Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai – 400018 Mumbai – 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacc1641C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mandar Vaidya Respondent By : P.D. Chougule Date Of Hearing 16.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac For A.Y. 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Treating The Appellant'S Appeal As 'Delayed Solely Because The Appeal, In The First Instance, Was Filed Manually & Not Electronically. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Misdirected Himself In Not Appreciating That Failure To File The Appeal Electronically, In The First Instance Is, At Best, A Procedural Defect & The Difference Between 'Manual' & 'Electronic' Is, Merely Of Form. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not, In The Given Circumstances, Justified In Declining To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal 4. The Ld. Cit(A) Fell In Error In Not Appreciating That Plurality Of Objects Was Not Precluded In The Purposes Contemplated U/S.11(2) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: P.D. Chougule
Section 11(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

P a g e | 1 HBS Realtors Pvt.Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT-7(1)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E