← 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)

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 699/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 686/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 685/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 684/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 683/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 682/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 681/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 680/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 221Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM ITA

Trichur Taluk Co Operative College Educational Society Ltd No R-728, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer-W-2(1), Ayakar Bhavan-Thrissur

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

ITA 644/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2015-16 Trichur Taluk Co-Op. College .......... Appellant Educational Society Ltd. Kallingal Lane, Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Aaaat7283K] Vs. The Income Tax Officer. Ward-2(1), Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: Smt. Mini Chandran, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2025

For Appellant: Smt. Mini Chandran, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 153BSection 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM Assessment

Vidya Vikas Pratishtan, Solapur vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Pune

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

ITA 902/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Vidya Vikas Pratishtan, Vs. Assessment Unit, 72/2B, Pratap Nagar, Income Tax Department. Soregaon, Solapur- 413004. Pan : Aaatv8537F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Duly Supported By An Affidavit That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

without adjudicating the matter on merits and without dealing with the specific grounds and merits, in violation of the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act and therefore, the impugned order, being non-speaking and devoid of proper reasoning, is bad in law and deserves to be quashed

Shobharam Tulshiram Prajapat, Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Jalgaon

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

ITA 2128/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Ajitesh Meena
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2128/PUN/2025

Machhindra Ishwarchand Sarode, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Thirteen(Four), Pune

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

ITA 1746/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajitesh Meena
Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 56(2)(x)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1746/PUN/2025

Shyamnagar Anchal Skus Ltd., Bankura vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Bankura

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

ITA 711/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

Sarang Dealcom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1230/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250Section 68

made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We note that section 250(6) casts a duty on the Ld. CIT(A) to pass an order in appeal which should state the points for determination and a decision ... well as the reason for arriving at such decision. The provisions of section 250(6) are reproduced as under: “250(6) – The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason

Sonali Mahendra Naik Gaunekar, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Panaji

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 313/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 50C

NFAC is required to; (1)state point of determination, (2) its decision thereon and (3) clear reasons therefore in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. Thus any order to be regular & legal, it must comply with former threefold dictates, and conversely non-adherence thereto would ceases the order

Viswanathan Krishnakumar, Aluva vs. Income Tax Officer -Ward(2), Aluva

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar P.J., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 144BSection 148Section 24Section 250(6)Section 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA Nos. 607 & 608/Coch/2025 Assessment Years

Viswanathan Krishnakumar, Aluva vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward(2), Aluva

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar P.J., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 144BSection 148Section 24Section 250(6)Section 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA Nos. 607 & 608/Coch/2025 Assessment Years

Veekaybuilders and Developers, Ernakulam vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward-1(1), Kochi

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

ITA 595/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Veekay Builders & Developers .......... Appellant Neduvile Vakamokotti Hosue, Thrikkakara North Thrikkakara S.O. 682021, Ernakulam [Pan: Aamfv9490R] Vs. Ito, Non Corporte Ward- 1(1), Kochi .......... Respondent Assessee By: Ms. Binisha Baby, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.10.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 13.01.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm. The Assessee Did Not File Return Of Income For Ay 2017-18. As Per The Information Available With The Department, The Appellant Had Incurred Substantial Expenditure For Purchase Of Heavy Motor Vehicles. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Found That The Appellant Had Purchased Jcb & Tipper For Rs. 22,50,000/- & Rs. 27,81,379/-, Respectively.

For Appellant: Ms. Binisha Baby, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2017-18 Veekay Builders

Vasantham Silks, Palakkad vs. ITO, Ward-4, Palakkad

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

ITA 582/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vasantham Silks .......... Appellant A H Plaza Agali Post, Mannarkkad Taluk Palakkad 678581 [Pan: Aakfv4469L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Palakkad .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri M.V. Venugopal, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Venugopal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vasantham Silks

Rajeev Nain Mishra, Gangtok vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Gangtok

ITA 1916/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM