Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.359

Section 250(6) falls under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 359 (Procedure in appeal) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 359 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 250(6) is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 of the 6,270 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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.

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.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar
1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported
225
citing judgments

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
171 Taxmann.com 696 · 2025 · High Court
200
citing judgments

The ITAT fails to uphold natural justice when it doesn't address an infirmity regarding an assessee being denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the matter ex-parte.

Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Nagpur v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
69 Taxmann.com 407 · 2016 · High Court
159
citing judgments

The Commissioner (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution; the law does not empower them to do so. The appeal must be decided on merits and in writing, stating points for determination, decision, and reasons.

Judgments on Section 250(6)

Shri Rakesh Sadana, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward1(3), Jalandhar

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

ITA 202/ASR/2018[20014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023

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

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250

Navneet Jhamb vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Faridabad

The appeal is allowed and the

ITA/3509/2018HC Punjab & Haryana12 Sept 2023
Section 153ASection 250Section 260

M/S. Xylo Marketing Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, C.C-3(2), Kolkata vs. ACIT, C.C-3(2), Kolkata.

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

ITA 725/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, J & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 725/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 M/S. Xylo Marketing Pvt. Limited,...............Appellant (Formerly Known As : Commit Marketing Pvt. Ltd.) 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Mercantile Building, Block-B, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan: Aadcc6225B] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,........Respondent Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 12, 2023 O R D E R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68o

Davinder Singh vs. Asstt. Comm of Wealth Tax Circle IV

Appeal stands allowed and the

WTA/2/2013HC Punjab & Haryana11 Sept 2023
Section 18(1)(c)Section 250(6)Section 27Section 27A

Sant Sharan Upadhyaya, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Allahabad

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

ITA 56/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad11 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.56/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बनधम/ Sant Sharan Upadhyaya Ito, Ward-1(5) S/O Shri R. G. Upadhyaya, Allahabad Vs. 11-B, Bank Road, 11-B, Bank Road, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh- Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh- 211002. 211002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aalpu4991K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 01.03.2023 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. None Appeared For The Assessee. However, On Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Especially Ground No. 3, It Is Noted That The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Impugned Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Ex-Parte, Without Hearing The Assesse. 3. It Is Noted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Impugned Order Ex-Parte Without Looking Into Merits Of The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee. Ld. Cit(A) Has Made A Bald Statement That He Is Passing The Appellate Order On Merits, But, I Find In This Context That He Has Passed The Order On Issues Raised Without Discussing Any Relevant Facts/Law. Therefore, The Impugned Action Of Ld. Cit(A) Cannot Be Countenanced For Non-Application Of Mind & For Not Giving Reason

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250(6)

Keshav Deo Tripathi, Allahabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Allahabad

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

ITA 14/ALLD/2023[F.Y-2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.14/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनधम/ Keshav Deo Tripathi Ito, Ward-1(2) 74-A/5, Pura Dalel, 38, M. G. Marg, Vs. Allahabad, Allahabad- Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh- 211002. 211001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abupt7287K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Utkarsh Gupta Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 16.12.2022 For Ay. 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Pointed Out That The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Is An Ex-Parte Order & Therefore Prayed That Assessee Be Given An Opportunity Of Hearing Before The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri Utkarsh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250(6)

M/S Janiyyathul Mustharshideen Charitable Trust, Malappuram vs. ITO Ward 1, Tirur

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

ITA 980/COCH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember Janiyyathul Mustharshideen The Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust Ward -1, Tirur Edayoor Post Vs. Malappuram 676554 [Pan:Aaatj6491Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shameem Ahmed, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.09.2023 O R D E R Persanjay Arora, Am This Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The In Limine Dismissal Of It’S Appeal Vide Order Dated 31.10.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [Cit(A)], Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 28.03.2013 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Leading To The Instant Appeal Are That The Assessee, A Public Charitable Trust Constituted Under The Trust Deed Dated 28.06.1999 & Registered U/S.12Aa Of The Act W.E.F. 20.10.2005, Returned It’S Income For The Relevant Year (On 29.06.2010) At Nil Income, Claiming Exemption U/S.11 Of The Act On The Voluntary Contributions Received During The Year, I.E., Rs.12.18 Lakhs. The Same Was Denied By The Assessing Officer (Ao) As The Assessee Had, Subsequent To Its Registration Under Section 12Aa Of The Act On 20.10.2005, I.E., On 21/10/2005, Totally Amended It’S Object Clause, Which Rather Was Required To Be Ratified By The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shameem Ahmed, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 192Section 250(6)

Shri Pankajbhai Karamshibhai Savani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(3)(3), Surat

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

ITA 234/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.234/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) Pankajbhai Karamshibhai Savani, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), C-201, Saimilan Residence, Sudama Surat. Chowk, Mota Varachha, Surat - 395006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Berps5247H (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, Ca Assessee By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 26/06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11/09/2023

Section 143(3)

Bal Bharti Nursery School, Allahabad vs. ITO(Exemption), Allahabad

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

ITA 65/ALLD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad08 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.65/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) बनधम/ Bal Bharti Nursery Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant School Income Tax Officer/National E- Vs. 13, Kamla Nehru Assessment Centre, Delhi. Road, Civil Lines, Central Revenue Building, M. G. Allahabad-211001. Marg Income Tax Officer, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh-211001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaatb6395D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 30.03.2023 For Ay. 2018-19. 2. None Appeared For Assessee. From Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee, It Is Noted That The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Impugned Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passing Ex-Parte Order Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Which We Find It To Be Factually Correct I.E. Impugned Order Is An Ex-Parte Order. It Is Noted That Ld. Cit(A) Had Issued Twice Notice On 16.03.2023 & 25.03.2023 & Since Assessee Did Not File Any Reply To Both Notices, Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Impugned Order. From The Averment Made By Ld. Cit(A) Of Issuing Notices At Para 4 Of His Order, It Is Not Clear As To Whether He Has Given Any Specific Time For Compliance Of His Notices. First Notice Of Ld Cit(A) Was On 16.03.2023 & Second Notice Was On 25.03.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250(6)

Viping Kumar Pandey, Allahabad vs. ITO, Range-1(5), Allahabad

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

ITA 60/ALLD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad08 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.60/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बनधम/ Vipin Kumar Pandey Ito, Range-1(5) 574, Old Katra, Allahabad, 38 M. G. Marg, Vs. Uttar Pradesh-211002. Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh- 211001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amvpp1099B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 28.12.2022 For Ay. 2010-11. 2. None Appeared For The Assessee. However, On Perusal Of The Ground No. 2 Of The Assessee, It Is Noted That The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Without Hearing The Assessee. It Is Noted That The Ld. Cit(A) Had Issued Twice Notices, Directing The Assessee To File Reply By 02.12.02022. & Taking Note That The Assessee Did Not File Any Reply, He Was Of The Opinion That The Assessee Has Nothing More To Say In Respect Of The Grounds Of Appeal Raised Before Him & Resultantly, Confirmed The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.7,60,200/- Ex-Parte Qua Assessee. It Is Noted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Confirmed The Action Of The Ao Without Discussing Either The Relevant Facts/Law On The Issues Raised By The Assessee. Merely By Stating That He [Ld Cit(A)] Has Passed The Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250(6)

Pankaj Gaur, Allahabad vs. ITO-2(2), Allahabad

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

ITA 59/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad08 Sept 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250

Devlan Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Fatehpur vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Fatehpur

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

ITA 49/ALLD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad08 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.49/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनधम/ Devlan Sadhan Sahkari Ito, Ward-2(4) Samiti Ltd. Fatehpur, Income Tax Vs. Devlan Fatehpur-212621. Office, Fatehpur-212601. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aactd5418M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Mayank Arora Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.03.2023 For Ay. 2017-18. 2. None Appeared For The Assessee. However, From Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal It Is Noted That The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Hearing The Assessee. It Is Noted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Ex-Parte Order After Giving Notices To The Assessee On Five (5) Occasions. Since Assessee Did Not File Reply, Ld Cit(A) Of The View That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Prosecuting The Matter. & Therefore, He Was Of The Opinion That He Had No Other Option But To Dispose The Appeal Ex-Parte. From A Perusal Of The Statement Of Facts/Grounds Of Appeal Filed By Assessee Before This Tribunal, It Is Noted That The Assessee Society Was Not Aware Of The Proceedings/Hearing Of Appellate Proceedings Since Assessee Was Dependent Upon The Ld. Ar Who Was At Fatehpur.

For Appellant: Mayank AroraFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 250

Dipak Champaklal Chevli, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(2)(1), Surat

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

ITA 374/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.374/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Dipak Champaklal Chevli, Vs. The Ito, B. No.13, Vijay Nagar Co. Op. Ward – 2(2)(1), Society, Majura Gate, Surat Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abmpc1808M (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Ar Appellant By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 06/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/09/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

Dineshkumar Ujabhai Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS 3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 389/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.388 & 389/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Dineshkumar Ujabhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, At-Surajpura, Po.Songra, Tal: Tds-3, Palanpur, Banaskantha, Gujarat, Ahmedabad India Residential Address: B-303, Saroj Park, Opp. Gali Tower, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajbpp4111H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271C

Dineshkumar Ujabhai Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS 3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 388/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.388 & 389/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Dineshkumar Ujabhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, At-Surajpura, Po.Songra, Tal: Tds-3, Palanpur, Banaskantha, Gujarat, Ahmedabad India Residential Address: B-303, Saroj Park, Opp. Gali Tower, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajbpp4111H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271C

Devendra Singh, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Range-1, Allahabad

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

ITA 67/ALLD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad05 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Mr. Devendra Singh, The Deputy Commissioner Of 166A, Puravaldi Kydganj, V. Income Tax, Range-1, Allahabad, Allahabad-211003,U.P. U.P. Pan:Aexps6329H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.09.2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54Section 54F

Shri Ved Prakash Sharma, Mandideep vs. The ITO, Raisen

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 109/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2015-16 Ved Prakash Sharma, Ito, 23-24, Micaply, Raisen बनाम/ Industrial Area, Mandideep, Vs. Distt. Raisen (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Acrps2997R Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2023

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

Yakub Musa Patel, Bharuch vs. Income-Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Bharuch

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

ITA 467/SRT/2023[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Surat05 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.467/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Virtual Hearing) Yakub Musa Patel, Vs. The Ito, 72, Capital Business Centre, Ward – 1(1), Panch Batti, Bharuch - 392001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akmpp8976A (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Tansim A. Kaviwala, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/09/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

Cadence Design Systems (Ireland) Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle 1(2)(1) (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 247/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshcadence Design Systems Vs. Acit, (Ireland) Ltd, Circle-1(2)1(1), Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India International Taxation, Llp Building No. 10, Tower B, New Delhi 7Th Floor, Dlf Cyber City Complex, Dlf City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcc9139J Assessee By : Ms. Reema Grewal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04/09/2023

For Appellant: Ms. Reema Grewal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 199Section 250(6)

Piyush Kantilal Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Surat

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

ITA 465/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Surat04 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.465/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) Piyush Kantilal Patel, Vs. The Ito, E-101, Stuti Universal, Green Ward – 2(2)(3), City Road, Pal, Surat – 395009. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Auupp6600P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04/09/2023

Section 144Section 250(6)