This compilation indexes twelve Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) rulings pronounced between June 2026 and August 2026, all engaging Section 250(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rulings span ITAT benches at Raipur, Hyderabad, and Delhi, and are drawn from the TaxNoticeAI structured legal corpus. The collection is intended for use by in-house tax teams, Big-4 associates, and law firm researchers who need a structured reference point for procedural issues arising at the first appellate stage — particularly around ex-parte dismissals by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and delay condonation at the ITAT level.

Research index only. This page is a structured case-law reference compiled for research purposes. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice, tax advice, or a recommendation to take any particular course of action. Readers must verify all cases against the full judgments and consult qualified professionals before acting on any information.

The statutory framework in one paragraph

Section 250(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] to make such further inquiry as the Commissioner thinks fit, or to direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to the Commissioner, in the course of disposing of an appeal. The provision vests discretionary investigative authority in the first appellate authority and forms the statutory basis upon which the CIT(A) conducts hearings, issues notices to appellants, and — where an appellant fails to comply with such notices — may pass ex-parte orders disposing of the appeal for non-compliance. The procedural integrity of proceedings under Section 250(4) is a recurring subject of challenge before ITAT benches across India, giving rise to questions of natural justice, condonation of delay, and the remand of ex-parte appellate orders.

The 12 rulings

1. Shankar Lal Chhugani, Raipur,Raipur vs ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur, Raipur

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 5 August 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed against the respective orders of the CIT(Appeals), Raipur-3, for assessment years 2019-20 and 2020-21, as per ITA Nos. 527 & 528/RPR/2026. At the outset, the Tribunal noted that both appeals were time-barred by 131 and 72 days respectively, and the assessee had filed an affidavit dated 31.07.2026 along with a condonation application seeking to explain the delay.

2. Amrita Pandey, Raipur, Raipur vs ITO-4(1), Raipur, Raipur

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 5 August 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal, filed as ITA No. 389/RPR/2026, arose from the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 03.11.2025 for assessment year 2016-17. The Tribunal noted at the outset that the appeal was time-barred by 107 days, and the assessee had filed an affidavit dated 21.07.2026 along with a condonation application; the Tribunal further observed that there was no material or evidence on record filed by the Revenue to suggest malafide or deliberate conduct on the part of the assessee.

3. Amit Singh Thakur, Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Central Circle, Bilaspur, Bilaspur

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 3 August 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 420/RPR/2026 against the order of the CIT(Appeals), Raipur-3 dated 24.12.2025 for assessment year 2016-17. The Tribunal noted at the outset that the appeal was time-barred by 83 days, and the assessee had filed an affidavit dated 15.05.2026 along with a condonation application seeking to explain the delay.

4. M/S Partha Industries vs ITO, Ward-Mahasamund, Mahasamund

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 31 July 2026
Sections engaged: 114(g), 250(4), 69C
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 556/RPR/2026 against the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 05.05.2026 for assessment year 2020-21. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal due to non-compliance by the assessee, with the source preview recording that the appellant did not respond to a notice issued on 26.08.2025 with a compliance date of 10.09.2025.

5. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Hyderabad vs Sri Indra Power Energies Limited

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Date: 29 July 2026
Sections engaged: 143(2), 143(3), 250(4), 68, 69
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed by the Revenue as ITA No. 1353/Hyd/2025, directed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 17/06/2025, for assessment year 2017-18. Per the source preview, the assessee company was engaged in the business of generation and transmission of electricity on a commercial basis from a Bio Mass Power Plant and had filed its return of income; the Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s order arising out of the assessment order passed under the Act dated 22/12/2019.

6. Satyanarayan Agrawal, Raipur,Raipur vs ACIT, Central Circle-2, Raipur, Raipur

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 9 July 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 483/RPR/2026 against the order of the CIT(Appeals), Raipur-3 dated 29.03.2026 for assessment year 2020-21. At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee; an adjournment petition was filed but rejected, and the Tribunal proceeded to hear the matter on the basis of the CIT-DR's submissions and the materials on record.

7. Revaram Prajapati, Mumbai,Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 9 July 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 537/RPR/2026 against the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dated 20.04.2026 for assessment year 2018-19. At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee nor was any adjournment petition filed; the Tribunal noted from the impugned order that the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had passed an ex-parte order dismissing the assessee's appeal due to non-compliance by the assessee.

8. Yashree Petroleum,Meerut vs ITO Ward 1(2)(4), Meerut

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Date: 9 July 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 2735/Del/2026 against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2022-23/10455786 dated 30.01.2026, for assessment year 2023-24. Per the source preview, the assessee is a firm engaged in the retail sale of automotive fuel that filed its return of income on 15.10.2023 declaring total income at Rs. 1,47,00,606/-; the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and involved a loan of Rs. 1,43,00,000/- from one Shri Latur Si— (name truncated in source).

9. Subhash Agarwal,Ambikapur vs Income-Tax Officer- Ward-1

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 2 July 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeals were filed as ITA Nos. 466 & 467/RPR/2026 against the respective orders of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 13.03.2026 for assessment year 2015-16. The source preview notes that one appeal related to quantum addition and the other to a penalty matter; the assessee's counsel submitted that there was non-compliance before the CIT(A)/NFAC and an ex-parte order had been passed in both cases.

10. ACIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad vs Sirisha Lagadapati, Hyderabad

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Date: 1 July 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed by the Revenue as ITA No. 251/Hyd/2024, directed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 17.01.2024, pertaining to assessment year 2021-22. Per the source preview, the Revenue raised grounds of appeal challenging the CIT(A)'s order; the full substantive findings are not available within the source preview.

11. China Construction Sausam (India) vs Jcit(Osd) Cc-13, Delhi

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Date: 30 June 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4), 250(6)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 1932/Del/2026 against the order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the CIT(A)-26, Delhi for assessment year 2023-24. Per the source preview, the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction as a civil contractor; for the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs. 14,92,85,180/- which was revised to Rs. 25,75,42,680/- during assessment proceedings, and the impugned order included an addition of Rs. 22,32,47,960/- assessing income to Rs. 48,07,90,640/-.

12. Ratan Lal Batra, Raigarh,Raigarh vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raigarh

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur
Date: 22 June 2026
Sections engaged: 250(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed as ITA No. 488/RPR/2026 for assessment year 2010-11. The source preview records a detailed table of notices issued under Section 250 of the Act from 15.07.2020 through at least 09.07.2025, all delivered to the assessee, with "No reply received" recorded against each notice — indicating a sustained pattern of non-compliance across multiple years of appellate proceedings before the CIT(A).

Patterns across these 12 rulings

Ex-parte dismissal for non-compliance is the dominant procedural issue. Across multiple cases in this set — including M/S Partha Industries (case 4), Revaram Prajapati (case 7), Subhash Agarwal (case 9), and Ratan Lal Batra (case 12) — the CIT(A) or CIT(A)/NFAC had passed ex-parte orders dismissing the first appeal due to non-compliance by the assessee with notices issued under Section 250 of the Act. This pattern recurs across both faceless (NFAC) and non-faceless CIT(A) proceedings.
Delay condonation at the ITAT stage is a near-universal preliminary issue. In cases 1, 2, and 3 (Shankar Lal Chhugani, Amrita Pandey, and Amit Singh Thakur), the ITAT noted at the outset that the appeals were time-barred — by 131 and 72 days, by 107 days, and by 83 days respectively — with the assessees filing affidavits and condonation applications. The question of whether the delay should be condoned appears to be the threshold issue the Tribunal addresses before proceeding to the merits.
Revenue absence at ITAT hearings is not a barrier to disposal. In cases 6 and 7 (Satyanarayan Agrawal and Revaram Prajapati), the assessee or its representative did not appear at the ITAT hearing. In case 6, an adjournment petition was filed but rejected, and the Tribunal proceeded on the basis of the CIT-DR's submissions and the record. This indicates that ITAT benches in this dataset are willing to proceed ex-parte at the appellate level where the assessee has not engaged.
Both assessee-filed and Revenue-filed appeals appear in the dataset. While most appeals in this compilation are filed by assessees challenging CIT(A) orders, cases 5 and 10 (ITO vs Sri Indra Power Energies and ACIT vs Sirisha Lagadapati) involve Revenue appeals directed against CIT(A)/NFAC orders that were favourable to the assessee. This reflects that Section 250(4) proceedings at the CIT(A) level generate appellate litigation from both sides.
Raipur Bench dominates the dataset, reflecting concentrated NFAC-linked appellate traffic. Nine of the twelve rulings in this compilation originate from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur, with two from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad and one from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi. The concentration of Raipur bench rulings, involving NFAC Delhi orders, is consistent with the centralised faceless appeal mechanism routing first-appellate orders through NFAC irrespective of the assessee's geographic location.

How to use this compilation

This compilation is a structured index of publicly available ITAT orders and should be treated as a starting point for legal research, not a substitute for reading the full judgment. Each entry above is drawn from the text preview and identity fields available in the TaxNoticeAI corpus; the source previews are necessarily truncated and may not capture the full reasoning, operative order, or any subsequent developments. Researchers should retrieve and read the complete order from indiankanoon.org or the official ITAT portal before drawing any conclusion about a case's holding, ratio, or applicability.

All cases in a tax research database of this kind should be checked for subsequent developments: appeals to the High Court or Supreme Court, remand orders that have since been re-decided, or stays granted by a superior court. The outcome field for every case in this compilation reads "Outcome not specified in source," meaning the operative direction of the Tribunal's order could not be definitively extracted from the available preview. Researchers must therefore consult the full text of each order to determine whether the Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the ex-parte CIT(A) order, remanded the matter, or dismissed the appeal.

Finally, where Section 250(4) intersects with CBDT instructions on NFAC procedures, Standard Operating Procedures for faceless appeals, or administrative circulars governing the conduct of appellate proceedings, researchers should cross-reference those materials alongside the case law. Judicial rulings on procedural compliance under Section 250(4) may be read alongside applicable CBDT circulars and notifications to obtain a complete picture of the current legal and administrative framework.

Source

All cases listed above are drawn from the TaxNoticeAI structured legal corpus (16,101 Indian tax judgments, CBIC circulars, ITAT rulings, AAR rulings, GSTAT rulings), sourced from indiankanoon.org and official court portals.

Section 250(4) Income Tax Appeals: 12 ITAT Rulings on Ex-Parte Orders and Procedural Compliance (2026)