“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)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Thane vs. Hemchand Murji Gada, Mumbai

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

ITA 2118/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-1, Thane, Room Shri Hemchand Murji Gada, No. 22, B-Wing 6Th Floor, Ashar B-2, Laxman Nagar Near Vs. It Park, Wagle Industrial Aradhana Cinema Panch Estate, Thane(W)-400604 Pakhadi Kaju Pada, Thane(W)-400602. Pan No. Aacpg 2047 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Satya Prakash SinghFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chogule, CIT-DR

causing to be made a "further inquiry" in exercise of the power under a "further inquiry" in exercise of the power under Section 250(4) Section 250(4). This approach not having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT, and approach not having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT

Best Auto Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1753/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv

Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI

Best Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3052/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv

Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 95/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

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 Nos.92 to 95/NAG/2021 (04 appeals) Murli Industries Ltd., [A] Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 94/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 93/NAG/2021[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2012-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

Murli Industries Ltd., Chandrapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 92/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2112/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

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). Further, section 250(6) obliges the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2105/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2104/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2103/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

U S Roofs Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO, Nfe-Ass C, Delhi Delhi, Delhi

ITA 2102/MUM/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250

Eternis Fine Chemicals Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Mumbai

ITA 2079/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy. Sassessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Eternis Fine Chemicals Ltd., The Cit(Appeals), B 1004, Peninsula Tower, Nfac, Peninsula Corporate Park, Mumbai. G.K.Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai-400 013. [Pan: Aaach 3757 J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh Jain, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.D.Chougule, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 195Section 32Section 35Section 40

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Raipur vs. Aviral Finance Private Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 13/RPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.13/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Ito-4(1) Aviral Finance Pvt. Ltd. Raipur Ground Floor, Nalghar Chowk, Raipur – 492 001 [Pan: Aabcg 2701 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Shri Praveen Goyal, Cas ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2023

For Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

satisfied with the enquiries made by the AO, the Learned CIT(A) having concurrent powers with that of the AO under Section 250(4) of the Act. He himself could have made the necessary enquiries so as to arrive at a logical conclusion on the issue, however, Learned

Control Risks India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 6(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

fettered or circumscribed by Rule 46A for admission of additional evidences. In view of mandate of provisions of Section 250(4) of the Act also, the situation existing in the case as narrated above, clearly warranted admission of additional evidences by the CIT(A). We are thus convinced

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Aryan Builders and Developers Private Limited, Raipur

In the result, both appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed in terms of our observations

ITA 201/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Singhania, CA, &For Respondent: Shri S.K.Meena, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 250(4)Section 68

1 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश

Amit Harit, Meerut vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Noida

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

ITA 1045/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediaamit Harit Vs. Dcit G-15/6, Shastri Nagar, Meerut International Taxation Uttar Pradesh – 250 004 Noida Pan No. Abzph 9529 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144

fettered or circumscribed by Rule 46A for admission of additional evidences per se. In view of the mandate of overriding provision of Section 250(4) of the Act also, the situation existing in the case as narrated above clearly warranted admission of additional evidences

Bajaj Steel Industies Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assessig Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 20/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.20/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Bajaj Steel Industries The Assessing Officer, Limited, Vs National E-Assessment 539/540, Imambada Road, Centre, Delhi. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaacb 5340 H Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajesh V. Loya – Ca Revenue By Shri Kailash Kanojiya – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)[Nfac], Delhi Dated 22.12.2022 For A.Y.2018-19 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Dated 24.04.2021. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : Bajaj Steel Industries Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

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

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Priyanshi Textile Private Ltd., Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 199/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.199/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Priyanshi Textile Pvt.Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), C/2, Plot No.74-79, Kim Sayan Vs. Surat, Room No.612, 6Th Floor, Road, Sunrise Interagated Textile Aayakar Bhawan, Near Majura Park, Kareli, Olpad, Surat- Gate, Surat-395001 394540 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacy 4125 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Nfac/Ld. Cit(A) For Short] Dated 30.04.2022, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 29.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “(I) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,72,33,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit In The Form Of Unsecured Loan U/S 68 Of The Act As The Assessee Has Failed To Prove Bona Fide Of The Transaction Within The Meaning Of Section 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. (Ii) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,08,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Unexplained Share Capital & Share Premium U/S 68 Of The Act, Since The Assessee Failed To Prove The Source Of Source.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर

Shri Bharat Arora, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circl-2E, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 196/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 250(4)

report vide letter no. 2084 dated 20.12.2021. During the course of forwarding of additional evidence to the AO, authorization was given under Section 250(4) to examine I.T.A. No. 196/Asr/2023 5 Assessment Year: 2011-12 the genuineness of the affidavit of Smt. Ripanjit Kaur by examining the said person