“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)

Mahendra Kumar Gupta, Indore vs. ACIT Circle-2(1), Raipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 138/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Raipur17 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.137/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mahendra Kumar Gupta Huf 404, Suraj Villa, 9/2, New Palasia, Indore (M.P)-452 001 Pan: Aaghm8528M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.138/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mahendra Kumar Gupta 404, Suraj Villa, 9/2, New Palasia, Indore (M.P)-452 001 Pan: Adcpg7886K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent : Mrs. Shelly Maheshwari, Ca Shri Ashish Goyal, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr

For Respondent: Mrs. Shelly Maheshwari, CA

Section 5

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 respective orders ... shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal) /NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 10. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Mahendra Kumar Gupta HUF, Indore vs. ACIT Circle-2(1), Raipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 137/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Raipur17 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

For Respondent: Mrs. Shelly Maheshwari, CA

Section 5

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel vs. Flowline Systems Pvt Ltd, New Panvel

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2168/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2168/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assistant Commissioner V Flowline Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, S 401, 402, Bhoomi Landmark, Panvel. New Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Maharashtra – 410206. Pan: Aabcf1096R Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri A R Sakhalkar & Shri M.R.Dharmadhikari –Ar’S Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 14.08.2024 For A.Y.2021-22 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Issued By Adit(Cpc), Bangalore. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 154Section 250Section 250(4)Section 46A(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”ए” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Manoj Kumar Jain, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

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

ITA 77/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.77/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Jain M/S. Vidyashree Trading, Ghul Ghul, Tilda, Neora, Raipur (C.G.)-493 114 Pan: Achpj6480G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

Appeals)/NFAC shall consider all the submissions of the assessee and come up with a speaking order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 8. As per the above terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Late Shanti Mohta, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Raipur

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

ITA 71/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.71/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Late Shanti Mohta 15/391, Jawahar Nagar, Ravigram S.O Chhattisgarh- 492 001 Pan: Aldpm6184F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 5

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.” 11. Respectfully following the aforesaid orders, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... Mohta Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 12. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Kalyan Gas Agency, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 62/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.62/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kalyan Gas Agency 1, New Bus Stand, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aagfk4563Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 5

Agency Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur 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.” 10. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, I set-aside the order ... comply with the hearing notices from the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 11. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Geeta Patel, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 125/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.125/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Geeta Patel House No.B-13, Sector-5, Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aeqpp8409Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Office, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

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 Geeta Patel Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur 7. Respectfully following the aforesaid orders ... shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 8. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Ranjeet Singh Saini, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 58/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Raipur09 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 58/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Brijmohan Prasad Gupta, Kanker vs. ITO, Ward- Jagdalpur, Jagdalpur

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

ITA 42/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.42/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Brijmohan Prasad Gupta Janakpur Ward, Tikrapara, Kanker (C.G.)-494 334 Pan: Adbpg3007B

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 68

recording any reasons or calling for an enquiry. It is neither a speaking order nor it has followed the mandate of provisions of Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. That there is no adjudication on merits by the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC on the submissions of the assessee and facts ... documentary evidences after which the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall consider all the submissions/evidence on record and pass a speaking order in terms with Section 250(4) and (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 5. As per the above terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Kamal Kishor Agrawal HUF, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

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

ITA 34/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.34/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Kamal Kishor Agrawal Huf 159, Shiv Ashis, Opp. Pandey Nurshing Home, Samta Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 011 Pan: Aadhk4707P

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 44ASection 68

been refunded from Shri Amit Kumar Agrawal. However, there had been no enquiry conducted by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 250(4) and (6) of the Act to verify these contentions. In the interest of natural justice, one final opportunity should be given to the assessee

Vivekanand Vaishnav, Korba vs. Income Tax Offier Ward-2, Korba

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

ITA 110/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.110/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vivekanand Vaishnav Office Of Cseb Je Barpali Cseb, Korba-495 674 (C.G.) Pan: Admpv0890N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vivekand Vaishnav, AssesseeFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 5

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.” 8. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... comply with the hearing notices from the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 9. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised

Pinnac Parijaat Co.Op. Hsg. Society Ltd, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 531/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.531/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Pinnac Parijaat Co. Op. V The Income Tax Officer, Housing Society Limited, S Ward-2(2), Pune. S.No.35, Hissa No.1,3,4,5,11,12, Karve Nagar, Pune – 411052. Pan: Aadap9430D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025 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, On 24.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Total Income Of The Appellant At Rs. 3,13,990/-Instead Of 1,01,830/-

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

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

M/S. Ugs Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1932/DEL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), MS MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS MADHUMITA

Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 49/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.44 To 49/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20 Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari Prop. Of M/S. Hk Enterprises, Flat No.102, First Floor, Jainam Planet, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G)-492 001 Pan: Afhpt4870R

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 47/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 46/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Mihilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 45/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 44/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-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.” 6. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals ... before the first appellate authority to substantiate his claim. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Nagpur vs. Sanjay Meemraj Agrawal, Nagpur

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 38/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 144Section 250(4)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

factual matrix of the AO having submitted remand report during the course of appellate proceedings, thus making provisions of section 250(4) and section 251(1)(a) no longer applicable. 2 Sanjay Meemraj Agrawal ITA no.38/Nag./2025 2. Any other ground that may be raised during the course of appellate