Section 249 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.358

Section 249 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 358 (Form of appeal and limitation) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 358 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 249 is 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT (242 ITR 381), cited in 32 of the 507 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 249

11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT
242 ITR 381 · 2000 · Supreme Court
32
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated unless the assessment proceedings based on a previously filed return have been terminated. Notice for reassessment cannot be issued while original assessment proceedings are pending.

Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia v. CIT
63 ITR 651 · 1967 · Supreme Court
27
citing judgments

The date of acquisition of shares, particularly in the context of rights issues, is the date the company's offer to subscribe to shares is made, not the date of allotment, physical issuance, or payment.

Jayvant Singh Vaghela v. ITO
40 Taxmann.com 491 · 2013 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Appeals should normally be decided on merits rather than dismissed on technical grounds like delay, unless there is gross negligence or mala fide intention by the assessee.

Agarwal v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority
14 SCC 578 · 2011 · Reported
18
citing judgments

A party must provide a valid explanation for each day of delay in filing an appeal and demonstrate a reasonable cause that was beyond their control.

DERC. 22. In Puna Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT
56 ITR 521 · 1965 · Supreme Court
17
citing judgments

Profits arising from statutory obligations, such as setting apart amounts for consumer rebates, are distinct from commercial profits and are governed by separate enactments. Such 'clear profits' are determined by statute, not commercial principles.

Siva Industries & Holdings Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle VI(3), Chennai
153 Taxmann.com 354 · 2023 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Appeals filed beyond the time limit permitted under section 249 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are not maintainable if there is no sufficient cause for the delay, leading to dismissal under sections 250 read with 251.

T Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT
39 ITR 8 · 1960 · Supreme Court
12
citing judgments

Income accrues or arises to an assessee when it becomes due to him, even if it is not actually received. The taxing of income is based on real income, not notional income.

Vaijayantabai Naburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil
125 STC 375 · Supreme Court
11
citing judgments

The expression 'sufficient cause' for condoning delay in filing an appeal should be liberally construed, with paramount importance given to advancing substantial justice. However, this principle must be applied judiciously based on the specific facts of each case.

247 (Delhi). (ix) Ravindra Kr. Verma v. CIT
73 Taxmann.com 117 · 2016 · High Court
10
citing judgments

The decision in Ravindra Kr. Verma v. CIT (2016) is cited as authority for principles related to assessments, likely concerning search and seizure proceedings, as indicated by the keywords and section numbers commonly associated with it.

Sitaram Ramcharan v. Nagarshana
1 SCR 875 · 1960 · Reported
9
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 249

Fakhri Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd.Ustee Company Ltd As Trustee for Fccb Issued by Jindal Saw Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT (A), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Appellant stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 785/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryfakhri Co-Operative Versus Commissioner Of Housing Society Ltd. Income Tax 422, Matharpakhadi Road, (Appeals) Mazgaon, Nfac, Delhi. Maharashtra-400010. Pan: Aaaaf1078N Appellant Respondent Appellant/Assessee By : Sh. Murtaza Quresh Ghandiali & Ms. Sabeena Darukhanawal, Ar Respondent/Department By : Ms. Mini Vinod, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/05/2023 Order Narender Kumar Choudhry, J.M: This Assessee/Appellant Herein Has Preferred This Appeal Against The Order Dated 12.01.2023 Impugned Herein Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) / Nfac, Delhi {In Short ‘Ld. Commissioner’} U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For Ay 2013-14. Fakhri Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. 2. In This Case, The Appellant Earned Interest From Co- Operative & Other Banks & Therefore, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 On 22.08.2013 Which Was Processed By Cpc & Vide Intimation Dated 12.11.2014 Under Section 143(1) Of The Act, The Amounts Of Rs. 2,08,071/- & Rs. 50,000/- Have Not Been Considered Under Section 80P(2)(C)(Ii) & Consequently Disallowed.

For Appellant: Sh. Murtaza QureshFor Respondent: Ms. Mini Vinod, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)(c)