← 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)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, the Chinars, Near Govt. Silk Factory, Rajbagh, Srinagar vs. Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Corporation Ltd., Srinagar, Kashmir

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed being

ITA 386/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Dalip K Kaul, C. A
Section 115JSection 135Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Srinagar, Kashmir vs. Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Corporation Ltd., Srinagar, Kashmir

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed being

ITA 385/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Dalip K Kaul, C. A
Section 115JSection 135Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- Srinagar, Rajbagh Sringar vs. Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Corporation Ltd., Srinagar, Kashmir

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed being

ITA 364/ASR/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Dalip K Kaul, C. A
Section 115JSection 135Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT

Pravinbhai Karshanbhai Rathod, Junagadh vs. ITO, Ward-1, Junagadh

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 289/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 250

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. Hence, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee, to plead his case before

Kirti Shantilal Solanki, Una-Dist. Gir Somnath vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4, Jnd-Veraval

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

ITA 100/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.100/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kirti Shantilal Solanki Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ Prop. Of M/S Navinchanda & Ward-4, Jnd, Veraval, Vs Co. Main Bazar, Library Yogeshwar Bhavan, Opp. S.T. Chowk, Una Dist. Gir Bus Stand, Veraval-362 265 Somnath-362 560 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bscps 8298 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri R.D. Lalchandani, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Dated 17.12.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 144 Of The Act, On 19.12.2019. 2. At The Outset Itself, Shri R.D. Lalchandani, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Assailed The Impugned Order By Contending That The Assessee Could Not Represent His Case Before Ld. Cit(A) & The Order Being An Ex-Parte Order, Stood Vitiated On Account Of Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice. Shri R.D.

For Appellant: Shri R.D. Lalchandani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)

served on the appellant. I also note that Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order, as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. That is, Ld. CIT(A) did not pass the order on merit ITA NO. 100/Rjt/2025 A.Y 17-18 Kirti S Solanki

The ITO-2 Surendranagar(Regular Charge Ward-4(2)(1)), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Pranav Prafulchandra Vora, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/AHD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL

Ashitkumar Ganesh Poria, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Pune

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

ITA 851/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.851/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ashitkumar Ganesh Poria, V The Dy.Cit(Central), 931, Raviwar Peth, Huseni S Circle-2(1), Pune. Trust, Near Dagadi Nagoba, Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aispp7097C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri T.S.Shelke – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 29.01.2025 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. During The Preceding Before Cit Appeal, The Appellant Has Requested Time For Preparation Of Submission & Explain The Disputed Issue Vide Letter Dated 28.01.2025, Acknowledgement

Section 246ASection 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

Pandurang Maruti Abhang, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 5(4), Pune

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

ITA 844/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.844/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Pandurang Maruti Abhang, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.203, Narayan Bag S Ward-5(4), Pune. Society, Lane No.8, Shiv Nagar, Kirkatwadi, Sinhagad Road, Pune – 411024. Maharashtra. Pan: Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Himanshu Choudhary – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 29.01.2025 For Assessment Year2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 250oSection 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

Payal Sanjay Soni, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Pune

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

ITA 799/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.799/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Payal Sanjay Soni, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.B12, Satyam Co-Op S Ward-6(3), Pune. Hsg Soc, Opp Gavkosh Maruti Mandir, 1452 Kasba Peth, Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Bncps5773C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pratik Sandbhor – Ar (Virtual Hearing) Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli – Add.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 13.01.2025 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 250Section 694Section 69A

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

Dnyankala Sanvardhini Sanstha, Pune vs. ITO Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune

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

ITA 794/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Pune15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.791/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Manju Rameshchandra Mutha, V The Income Tax Office, Om Shanti Complex, Nehru S Ward-1, Jalna. Road, Dist-Jalna – 431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Aztpm9323L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Prateek Jha – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 10.02.2025 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Prevaling In The Case, The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Appeal (Nfac) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 44Section 44ASection 69A

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

Yogesh Durgadas Phal, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 3(2), Pune

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

ITA 436/PUN/2025[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2025

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.436/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mr.Yogesh Durgadas Phal, V The Income Tax Officer, 309/33 Gokhale Nagar, Shivaji S Ward-3(2), Pune. Nagar, Opp.Patrakar Nagar, Haweli, Pune – 411016. Maharashtra. Pan: Abjpp1640F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sailee Gujarathi – Ca Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 29.11.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 234ASection 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

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

Paschim Nawpara Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited, Nadia vs. ITO, Ward - 41(3), Nadia

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.39/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Paschim Nawpara Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited...….……….Appellant Nawpara, Noapara B.O. Paschim Noapara, Nadia, 741255, W.B. [Pan: Aadap3765F] Vs. Ito, Ward-41(3), Nadia…………….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. K. Ray, R.C. Halder & Trideep Nayak, Advocates, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 24.01.2024 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, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 282 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Such Delay Explaining Reasons For The Delay. We, After Perusing The Petition Made In The Application, Satisfy That There Are Bona Fide & Sufficient Reasons For Such Delay. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay & Admit This Appeal For Adjudication. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessing Officer Received Information Regarding Cash Deposits Made By The Assessee During The Period Of Demonetization I.E. From 09.11.2016 To 31.12.2016 Amounting To Rs.2,46,000/- & Rs.8,48,500/- Maintained With Nadia District Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Ranaghat Branch, Nadia & Rs.2,19,500/-

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 69A

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy

Lakhmi Chand Mukesh Kumar, Bahadurgarh vs. Ward 2, Rohtak

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1135/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 1135/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Lakhmi Chand Mukesh Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Shop No. 26, Anaj Mandi, Ward-2, Bahadurgarh, Rohtak, Haryana-124507 Haryana-124001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacfl1261C Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2025 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No

Shambhu Dayal Modern School, Haryana vs. ITO(Exemption) Rohtak, Rohtak

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1126/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 1126/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Shambhu Dayal Modern School, Vs Income Tax Officer(Exemption) Gohana Road, Haryana-131001 Rohtak, Haryana-124001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabts9199M Assessee By : Ms. Sakshi Rustagi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2025 Order

For Appellant: Ms. Sakshi Rustagi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)

Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 5. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no 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. It is therefore

Subhash Chander & Sons (HUF), Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Rohtak, Haryana

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1117/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 1117/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Subhash Chander & Sons (Huf), Vs Income Tax Officer, 962/20, Shakti Nagar, Ward-2, Rohtak, Haryana-1241001 Rohtak, Haryana-124001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aauhs9666L Assessee By : Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250(6)

virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no 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

Atul Bansal, Indore vs. Additiona, Join, Deputy, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Officer NFAC Delhi, National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 704/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 44ASection 69A

Page 2 of 7 Atul Bansal ITA No. 704/Ind/2024 - AY 2017-18 3. Ld. AR for assessee at the outset submitted that the 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 ... assessee’s appeal 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-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside. 4. Having explained thus, Ld. AR went ahead

Jagdish Chand, Mandi Gobindgarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Mandi Gobindgarh

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

ITA 884/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate for Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication as the Ld. CIT(A) had failed to exercise his powers as enumerated in section 250(6) of the Act. 8.2 Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) dated 29.07.2024 and remand the matter back to the file

Vishwanath Madhav Jawale, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Pune

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

ITA 806/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.806/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Shah and Shri Rohit S. TapadiyaFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Scj Plastics Private Limited, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6108/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: S/Shri Gagan Kumar & Gagan Deep, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Manne Hareesh, Tenali vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Guntur

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

ITA 167/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnanआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.167/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Manne Hareesh Vs. Income Tax Officer Tenali Ward 1 (1) Pan:Aaihm7635M Guntur (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C.Subramanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That, On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The It Act

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)

justice and due process of law. 5. The ex-parte disposal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) contravenes the provisions of Section 250(6) of the IT Act, which mandates that the appeal be adjudicated on its merits with due consideration of the facts and submissions presented. 6