← 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)

Arunima Adcon Sevices (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward -3(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 5444/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 56Section 68Section 73A

order. In this case the Ld. NFAC has not decided the appeal on merits which was supposed to as per the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act which read as under; The order of the Deputy commissioner (Appeals) or as the case may be, the commissioner (Appeals) disposing

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Gen X Commodities (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3560/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit Vs M/S. Gen X Commodities (P) Ltd., Central Circle-29 Fa-45, Shivaji Enclave New Delhi New Delhi-110027 Pan-Aaaca2303H Appellant Respondent Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Revenue By Assessee By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Ayush Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2025

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA

Bhavesh Ishwarlal Panchasara, Rajkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot

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

ITA 95/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.95/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Bhavesh Ishwarlal बनाम Assistant Commissioner Of Panchasara Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Rajkot /Vs. 1, Mehulnagar Main Road, Near Khodiyar Temple, Rajkot-360 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aodpp 1375 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nimish Vayawala, Ld.A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

decided the issue in respect of the ground raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee requested to set aside the order of CIT(A) and requested the Bench that matter

Goverdhan Lal Yadav, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer-3(5), Indore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 854/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year : 2015-16 Goverdhan Lal Yadav, Ito-3(5) 112/12, Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Opp. Anoop Takies, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aaypy9432A Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 54B

first appeal summarily for non-prosecution but such an order passed by CIT(A) is not in accordance with the mandate of section 250(6) which prescribes thus: “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination

Haryana Financial Corporation, Chandigarh vs. DCIT Circle Panchkula, Panchkula

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

ITA 914/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, C.A and Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR &
Section 14ASection 250(6)

appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana, under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised various grounds in the present appeal relating

Haryana Financial Corporation, Chandigarh vs. DCIT Circle Panchkula, Panchkula

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

ITA 900/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, C.A and Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR &
Section 14ASection 250(6)

appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana, under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised various grounds in the present appeal relating

Haryana Financial Corporation, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Circle, Panchkula

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

ITA 1353/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, C.A and Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR &
Section 14ASection 250(6)

appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana, under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised various grounds in the present appeal relating

Haryana Financial Corporation, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle, Pachkula

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

ITA 1352/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, C.A and Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR &
Section 14ASection 250(6)

appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana, under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised various grounds in the present appeal relating

M/S Haryana Financial Corporation, Panchkula vs. ACIT, Circle, Panchkula

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

ITA 1351/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, C.A and Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR &
Section 14ASection 250(6)

appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana, under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised various grounds in the present appeal relating

Shree Halsidhnath Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Maharashtra vs. ITO Ward 2(1) Kolhapur, ITO Ward Two One Kolhapur

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as per terms indicated above

ITA 872/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.870&872/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Halsidhnath Nagari Ito Ward 2(1), Kolhapur Sahakari Patsanstha Vs Maryadit Ari Patsanstha Maryadit K475 E Ward, Shahu Road, Shahupuri, Kolhapur- 416003 Maharashtra Pan No. Aadas0448N Appellant/Assessee Respondent/Revenue

Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "A" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD

Shree Halsidhnath Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Maharashtra vs. ITO Ward 2(1) Kolhapur, ITO Ward Two One Kolhapur

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as per terms indicated above

ITA 870/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.870&872/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Halsidhnath Nagari Ito Ward 2(1), Kolhapur Sahakari Patsanstha Vs Maryadit Ari Patsanstha Maryadit K475 E Ward, Shahu Road, Shahupuri, Kolhapur- 416003 Maharashtra Pan No. Aadas0448N Appellant/Assessee Respondent/Revenue

Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "A" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD

Satbichar Distributors Private Limited, Kanpur vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 448/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250

complied with but he has not adjudicated the appeal on merit. In this respect, it is relevant to examine the provisions of section 250(6) which are reproduced as under: “250(6) – The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state ... points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.” 6. Thus, section 250(6) of the Act casts a duty on the Ld. CIT(A) to pass an order in appeal which should state the points for determination I.T.A. No.: 448/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Satbichar Distributors

Mr Chetnarayan Sitaram Singh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward-41(4)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 317/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya,ARFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan (Sr. DR)
Section 144Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(x)

assessee during these proceedings. Moreover, the ld.CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits which is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. The same is reproduced here under for your ready reference: "(6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall

Shafiq Ahmed, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 41(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3008/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shafiq Ahmed, Dy. Cit Circle-41(1)(1), Flat No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Building Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra Vs. No. 1 Om Sai Ekta (Sra), (East), Society, Cts No. 216, Gillbert Mumbai-400051. Hill Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400058. Pan No. Aowpa 3264 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Hasan Khan, Virtually Present
Section 148Section 148A

powers of the ld. CIT(A), as delineated under appeal on merits. The powers of the ld. CIT(A), as delineated under Section 250(6) of the Act, obligate the authority to pass a speaking Section 250(6) of the Act, obligate the authority to pass a speaking Section 250

E Ms Electicals & Enginerrs P Ltd, Mumbai vs. Ciecle9(2)(2), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1943/MUM/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya,ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 194CSection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

assessee during these proceedings. Moreover, the ld.CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits which is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. The same is reproduced here under for your ready reference: "(6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall

Uma Kesharwani, Allahabad vs. ITO Ward -1(3), Allahabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 45/ALLD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad23 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

appeal of the assessee on the merits and has not passed a speaking order. We are of the considered view, in view of section 250(6) of the I. T. Act, that the learned CIT(A) has statutory duty to pass a speaking order on merits on the various grounds

Rafikbhai Ajijbhai Virani, Jamnagar vs. The Assessement Unit NFAC Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 141/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 141/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Rafikbhai Ajijbhai Virani बनाम The Assessment Unit, National Steet No.2, Near Navnala, Faceless Assessment Center, Income /Vs. Gulabnagar Tari Hanuman Tax Department Road, Jamnagar-361007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ascpv 1519 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sankar Bakshi, A.R. राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Order (Ay) 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”, Dated 18.06.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Act Dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 2. “Reopening U/S 148A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) 1. The Learned The National Faceless Appeal Centre [“The Cit(A)”] & The Assessment Unti, Income Tax Department (“The Ao”) Erred In Fact & In Law In Initiating Proceedings U/S 148 Of The Act Without Issuing Notice U/S Ita No. 141/Rjt/2025 A.Y.17-18 Rafikbhai A Virani

For Appellant: Shri Sankar Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A

decided the issue in respect of the ground raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has not examined ITA No. 141/RJT/2025 A.Y.17-18 Rafikbhai A Virani assessment records and relevant documents

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

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

ITA 212/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA and Shri Vikas Yadav AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution whereas in view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-proseuction as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court ... erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution, whereas in view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non- prosecution, as held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court

Abhishek Singh, Unnao vs. Assessing Officer, Ward-2(4), Unnao

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

ITA 789/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250(6)

I.T.A. No.789/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUBHASH

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 275/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER