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)

Alisa Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Burdwan

ITA 329/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Alisa Cold Storage Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-1, Ltd., 1, J.B. Hazra Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Annexe, 2Nd Floor, Court Compound, Rasikpur, Buddwan, West Bengal-713101 Burdwan-713101 [Pan No.Aafca 7080 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri D.S. Damle, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 08-10-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 12-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Burdwan’S Order Dated 30.03.2017, Passed In Case No.60/Cit(A)/Bwn/Circle-1/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Twin Substantive Grounds Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenge Correctness Of Cit(A)’S Order Affirming The Assessing Officer’S Action In Both Adding Its Share Application Money Of ₹1,34,60,000/- To Be Unexplained Cash Credits Followed By Unexplained Investment Addition Of ₹2,75,63,680/-; Respectively Made In The Course Of Assessment In Issue Framed On 19.03.2015. Learned Counsel Submits During The Course Of Hearing That Although Assessee’S Managing Director Had Put In Appearance Before The

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 68

Rnb Digitronix Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO (TDS), WD-59(1), Kolkata

ITA 1077/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2011-12 Rnb Digitronix Pvt. Ltd., V/S. Income Tax Officer 53A, Free School Street, (Tds) Kolkata-16 Ward-59(1), Kolkata [Pan No.Calro 7433G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Natban Lal Jha, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Monda, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28-09-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Kolkata’S Order Dated 09.03.2016 Passed In Case No.4/Cit(A) 24/Kol/2014-15 U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. It Emerges At The Outset That The Cit(A)’S Has Passed His Lower Appellate Order Ex Part Whilst Affirming The Assessee’S Action Treating The Assessee To Be An Assessee In Default Qua Royalty Paid In The Relevant Previous Year Amounting To ₹24,97,318/- Liable For Tds Deduction @ 10% Coming To ₹2,49,732/-. He Has Coumputed Sec. 201(1) & 201(1A) Interest Of ₹2,49,732/- & ₹1.19,872/-; Respectively. Suffice To Say, Both The Learned Representatives Take Us To Cit(A)’S Order Para-4 Indicating The Assessee To Have Sought Adjournment On 18.02.2006 Followed By Similar Such

Section 154Section 201(1)Section 250(6)

M/S Bhagya Vinimoy Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(3), Kolkata

ITA 1012/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 M/S Bhagya Vinimoy Pvt. Income Tax Officer, बनाम Ltd., 7A, 1St Floor, R.No. Ward-5(3), Chowringhee / 101, Bentinck Street, Old V/S. Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Wing, Kolkata-001 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aabcb 4476 H] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Sunil Surana, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 21-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 19-09-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 1012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Kolkata’S Order Dated 13.02.2017 Passed In Case No.101/Cit(A)-23/W-5(3)/16-17, Affirming Assessing Officer’S Action Adding Its Share Application / Premium Of ₹1,38,50,000/- To Be Unexplained Cash Credits & Disallowance U/S 14A R.W.S. 8D Disallowance Of ₹1,34,454/- In Assessment Order Dated 13.03.2015, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Strongly Reiterated Their Respective Stands Against & In Support Of The Impugned Additions. Case File Perused. 2. It Emerges At The Outset That The Cit(A)’S Order Passed Ex Parte Has Rejected Assessee’S Twin Substantive Grounds (Supra) Mainly For The Reason That It Had Failed To

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)