← 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)

M/S Gca Marketing Pvt. Ltd, Bathinda vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-1, Bathinda

ITA 287/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Rajeshwer Singh Yadav, Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1910/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. BRR

Rajeshwer Yadav, Uttar Padesh vs. DCIT Central Circle, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1909/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. BRR

Green Airways Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5338/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ld. CA
Section 250(6)Section 37(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

Sangeeta Kapoor, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- II, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2654/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Sangeeta Kapoor, Versus Dcit, Central Circle-Ii C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Faridabad. Extension, Part-I, New Delhi. Pan: Abmpk7970L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agrawal, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Khoda, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 153ASection 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

Gabani Polyester Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(2), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 295/SRT/2022[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) finally dismissed the appeal of assessee without adjudicating the various grounds of appeal as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. The ld AR for the assessee submits that no notice was served on the assessee through email provided in Form-35 (Appeal ... appeal of Gabani Polyster Pvt Ltd. Vs ITO the assessee without adjudicating the issues on merit and as per the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision thereon

Gabani Polyester Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(2), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 294/SRT/2022[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) finally dismissed the appeal of assessee without adjudicating the various grounds of appeal as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. The ld AR for the assessee submits that no notice was served on the assessee through email provided in Form-35 (Appeal ... appeal of Gabani Polyster Pvt Ltd. Vs ITO the assessee without adjudicating the issues on merit and as per the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision thereon

Nisar Mahmad Dola, Surat vs. CIT (Appeals), NFAC

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 275/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Nishar Mahmad Dola, I.T.O., At Vankaner, Bardoli, Surat. Ward-2, Vs. Pan No. Asgpd 0749 R Bardoli. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 69A

appeal. I further find that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by assessee as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision

Neelkamal Cineplex P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-18(1), New Delhi

ITA 9701/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16 Neelkamal Cineplex Pvt. Ltd., Versus Income-Tax Officer, 107, 2Nd Floor, Shreshtha Ward 24(3), New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccn3668G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Bansal, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

Mohd. Momineen Qureshi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 46(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 8291/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr. Tariq Nafees, Ld. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Jitender Chand, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250(6)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

Raman Singh Sidhu, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands

ITA 151/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2010-11 Raman Singh Sidhu, Versus Acit, Central Circle-31, C/O R.S. Ahuja & Co., Ca, New Delhi C-353, Defence Colony, New Delhi. Pan: Aamps1070J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K

M/S N. A. Shaikh, Ankleshwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Bharuch

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 94/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S N.A. Shaikh, I.T.O., Shop No. 1, Old Shopping Centre, Ward 2(5), Vs. Nr. Pratin Crossing, Gidc, Bharuch. Ankleshwar-393002. Pan No. Aabfn 9617 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 2Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 40

case. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee without adjudicating the various grounds of appeal as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The M/s N.A. Shaikh Vs ITO ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee ... order. I further find that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by assessee as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision

Tusharkumar Ganeshbhai Gujarati, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 269/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Tusharkumar Ganeshbhai Gujarati, A.C.I.T., B-81, 2Nd Floor, Satlal Society, B/H, Central Circle-2, Vs. Hira Baug, Varachha Road, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Auspg 5205 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 69A

case. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee without adjudicating the various grounds of appeal as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has a good case on merit ... further find that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by assessee as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision thereon

Sh. Laxman Singh Chahar, .R. Compounder Ki Gali, Devipura, Sikar vs. ITO, Ward-4, Sikar

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

ITA 434/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: It, Hon’Ble Itat Is Prayed To Decide The Appeal On Merit Instead Of Setting Aside The Matter To Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal , CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 250(6)

reasoned and speaking order which has not been done by the ld. CIT(A) in the present case. Even otherwise the dictum of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 specifically states that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall state the points ... present case, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order in contravention of the specific direction given in Section 250(6) of the Act. Even otherwise, the reasoning for reaching to a conclusion is the foundation and hard bit of an order and in case conclusion

Vijender Singh Chaudhary, Delhi vs. ACIT, Range-62, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 8578/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usvijender Singh Vs. Acit Chaudhary Range-62 10, Transport Center, New Delhi Punjabi Bagh, Delhi – 110 026 Pan No. Addpc 8628 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Written Application By E-Mail Revenue By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.03.2023

Section 250(6)

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.08.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, New Delhi under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. On the date of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee

M.P.Vidhyut Mandal Karamchari Sahkarisakh Sansthan Ltd, Indore vs. The ACIT 4(1), Indore

ITA 349/IND/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 M.P. Vidhyut Mandal Acit, 4(1) Karamchari Sahkarisakh Indore बनाम/ Sansthan Ltd. Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaam 0580 C Assessee By Shri Vijay Bansal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

dismissed asseessee’s appeal without considering the adjournment-request dated 15.07.2022 filed before him. We further observe that 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 for determination ... observe that in the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal without complying with the said provisions of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and the matter is fit for remand

Rakesh Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for

ITA 6336/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2023AY 2010-11
Section 153ASection 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

directed to pass fresh order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee, ensuring proper adherence to section 250(6) of I.T. Act. (B.2.1) In view of the foregoing, and in the specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, we hold that ... after providing reasonable opportunity to Page 6 of 7 Rakesh Gupta vs. DCIT the appellant assessee, ensuring proper adherence to section 250(6) of I.T. Act. (C) In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. This order was pronounced in Open Court on 22/03/23

Shri Arshad Mohd Malik, Jammu vs. Inmcvome Tax Officer Ward 2 (4), Udhampur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 168/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69CSection 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

M/S Chemester Food Industry, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-III, Amritsar

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

ITA 583/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Shri Chetankumar Pragjibhai Rabadiya, Morbi vs. ITO Ward 1, Morbi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as un- admitted

ITA 12/RJT/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2011-12 Shri Chetankumar Pragjibhai Vs. Ito, Ward-1 Rabadiya Morbi. 115-Umiya Plot Vistar A/P : S. Sanala, Morbi. Pan : Alupr 8308 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-3, Rajkot [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A)Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Dated 29.11.2019 Pertaining To The Asst.Year 2011-12. 2. At The Time Of Hearing None Came Present On Behalf Of The Assessee Despite Service Of Notice Nor Any Application Seeking Adjournment Was Filed Before Us. Even In The Past When The Appeal Was Listed For Hearing On Four Occasions, Twice An Application Seeking Adjournment Was Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee By His 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

assessee against order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-3, Rajkot [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) dated 29.11.2019 pertaining to the Asst.Year 2011-12. 2. At the time of hearing none came