“Section 250(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 250Section 250(4)1,077 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 250(4) is Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (322 ITR 283), cited in 1,283 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 250(4)

Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO

322 ITR 283 · 2010 · Supreme Court

1,283

citing judgments

The interest income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in fixed deposits with banks is not "derived from" its eligible business activities and is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, thus not qualifying for deduction under Section 80P.

Pr. CIT v. Totagars

395 ITR 611 · 2017 · High Court

1,074

citing judgments

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from surplus deposits or investments held with a cooperative bank is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act.

Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

431 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court

999

citing judgments

Section 80P(4) serves as a proviso to Section 80P(1) and (2), excluding only cooperative banks that are cooperative societies and possess an RBI license for banking business. Its purpose is to exclude cooperative banks operating like commercial banks that lend money to the public.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows

73 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · Supreme Court

953

citing judgments

A notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether penalty proceedings are for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Such lack of specificity vitiates the penalty proceedings.

State Bank Of India v. CIT

389 ITR 578 · 2016 · High Court

817

citing judgments

Income arising from a cooperative society's surplus funds invested in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to the society's core activities and, therefore, is not eligible for exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society

392 ITR 74 · 2017 · High Court

762

citing judgments

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from its investments or surplus deposits with a cooperative bank is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

156 ITR 11 · 1985 · High Court

541

citing judgments

When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal

444 ITR 1 · 2022 · Supreme Court

524

citing judgments

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

Judgments citing Section 250(4)

Gulshan Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2242/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194HSection 250Section 40Section 44ASection 69A

have been raised by the assessee before him/her. On cumulative consideration of the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act read with sections 250(4), 250(5), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) of the Act and Explanation of section

Vinodray Khodidas Antala, Dhoraji vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the Appeal is hereby dismissed”

ITA 263/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 263/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Vindodray Khodidas Antala Vs. Income Tax Officer, Wd – 2(1)(1), C/O. Shree Jay Ambe Agro Fuel, Opp. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Atul Oilcake, Jetpur Road, Road, Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360410 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abppa8695M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kuldeep K. Adesara, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Kuldeep K. Adesara, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 69

Land. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in not complying the provisions of Section 250(4) and Section 250(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961 before passing impugned order by not examining the purchase deed of the Agricultural Land ... question. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in holding that provisions of Section 250(4) and Section 250(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961 are not required to be complied if the Appellant has not made any written submissions

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4309/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4308/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Mohammed Rauf Farook Khan, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 4015/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhukeshwar Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kasuri,(Sr. AR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 50CSection 56(2)(x)

that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as per section 250(4) of the Act. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide Page 6 ITA No. 4015/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 Mohammed Rauf Farook

Bharat Lal Tahalyani, Janjgir-Nalia, Janjhgir-Nalia vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 479/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 479/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

Md Iftakhar Alam, Araria vs. ITO, Purnea

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

ITA 389/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH AT KOLKATA [Virtual Court] Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH

Late Jyoti Shashikant Golatkar Thourgh Lr Mrujesh Shashikant Golatkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 30(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4201/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Prabhash Shankarlate Jyoti Shashikant V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Golatkar (Through Legal Heir, बनाम 30(1)(5), Kautilya Bhavan, Sri Mrugesh Shashikant Golatkar) C–41 To C-43, G-Block, 2B/35 Baf Hira Nagar, Bandra Kurla Complex, Kharodi (Marve Road), Malad Bandra (East), Mumbai – West, Mumbai – 400 095, 400051, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafpg5675C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Bikash Kumar Bogi a/w Ms. Mugda DashoraFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 69A

inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AOto make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as per section 250(4) of the Act. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have

Huhtamaki India Limited (Vista Film and Packaging Private Limited Merged Into Positive Packaging Industries Limited Which in Turn Merged Into Hutamaki India Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3365/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarhuhtamaki India Limited V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of (Vista Film & Packaging Pvt Ltd बनाम Income Tax, Ward – Merged Into Positive Packaging 14(1)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Industries Ltd. Which In Turn Merged Maharishi Karve Road, New Limited), 7Th Into Huhtamaki India Marine Lines, Mumbai – Floor, Bellona, The Walk, 400020, Maharashtra Hiranandani Estate, Ghodbunder Road, Sandozbaugh, Thane– 400 607, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact0086E Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AOto make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as per section 250(4) of the Act. However, it is equally true that the assessee himself did not make proper compliance during appellate proceedings. 5. In the light

Rahul Arun Mandlik, Pune vs. ITO WD- 5(2), Pune

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

ITA 1984/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1984/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rahul Arun Mandlik, V The Income Tax Officer, Sr No.34/3/2, Kashi S Ward-5(2), Pune. Vishveshewar Apartment, Nt Yenpure Nagar, Dhankawadi, Pune – 411043. Pan: Bmbpm1461M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Smt.Sonal L Sonkavde – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 30/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 16.12.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The Act, Dated 27.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. ITA No.1984/PUN/2025 [A] Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing

Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Pune, Akurdi vs. Shamsundar Kaliram Agarwal, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1428/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1428/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, V Shamsundar Kaliram Ward-8(1), Pune. S Agarwal, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Near Akurdi Railway Station, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Akurdi, Pune – 411044. Pan: Alzpa2906R Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue(Income Tax Officer, Ward- 8(1), Pune), Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 154 R.W.S 250 Of The Act, 1961 Dated 28.03.2025 Emanating From The Order Passed Under Section 250 R.W.S. 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147rSection 154Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251

thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to 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

Femina Concept Marketing & Retail Trading (Textiles) Co Private Limited, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6940/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Ravi GantraFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (Sr. DR)

Section 147Section 250Section 250(4)Section 56(2)(x)Section 69

remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer was very well within the powers of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 250(4) of the Act or under Rule 46A of the Rules. Therefore, order is passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under misconception

Bhagya Kalita, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 271A

Bhagya Kalita, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 256/GTY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 271A

Saroj Devi, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6 (4), Patna

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

ITA 242/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

Diamond Tradecom Private Ltd., Maharashtra vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 1389/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

Dattaprasad Radhakisan Revgade, Hivargaon vs. ITO Ward 2, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1897/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra, Judicialmember & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1897/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dattaprasad Radhakisan V The Income Tax Officer, Revgade, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. At Hivargaon Post Dongargaon, Tal Aklole, Ahmednagar – 422609. Pan: Cddpr8213C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna – Ar Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19 Dated 23.06.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)

Smt. Shanti Kurrey, Durg vs. ITO-1(5), Bhilai

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

ITA 532/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.532/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Shanti Kurrey Kumhari, Dhamdha, Dist. Durg, Chhattishgarh-491 001 Pan: Bqzpk2494L

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250

matter on merits. The 8 Smt. Shanti Kurrey Vs. ITO-1(5), Bhilai Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. 11. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

V.R. Sukhwani Projects, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer - Circle 2, Pune

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

ITA 1750/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1750/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 V.R.Sukhwani Projects, V The Income Tax Officer, Office No.B-1205, S Circle-2, Pune Amar Business Zone, Baner, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqfv3888H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Miss Sailee Gujarathi – Ar Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar– Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2022-23 Dated 22.01.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 04.03.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 234BSection 250Section 801BSection 80I

Wassimuddin Kazi, Bhilai vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai

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

ITA 537/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.537/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Wasimuddin Kazi Ews 410, Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai-490 023 (C.G.) Pan: Bmdpk4223K

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Appeals) shall provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass an order in terms of Section 250(4) and (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order.” 9. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... submit all the relevant documents as regards the merits of the case. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. 10. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes