Section 250 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.359

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 of the 26,976 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 250

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

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.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI
73 Taxmann.com 252 · 2016 · High Court
1,778
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E are not applicable for periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the amendment to section 200A inserting clause (c) was effective from that date.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
193 ITR 321 · 1992 · Supreme Court
1,695
citing judgments

The principle of consistency applies in tax matters, meaning a fundamental aspect found to be true in one assessment year should not be changed in a subsequent year if the order was not challenged.

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.

Judgments on Section 250

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Cir-11(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1082/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1082/Kol/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd…………..........................……....Appellant 4B, Little Russel Street, Kolkata- 700071. [Pan: Aabcg0816E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Adv. On Behalf Of Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.08.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. C.I"T.(A) On 16.08.2023 Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T.(A) Was Wrong In Confirming The Disallowance Towards Employees Contribution Towards

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)

Rushabh Precision Bearings, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 7(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3270/MUM/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3270/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Rushabh Precision Bearings बिधम/ Acit-7(2) Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Fida Mansion, 2Nd Floor, 4, Marg, Mumbai-400020. Babijan Street, Nagdevi, Mumbai-400002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr5214N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Ex-Parte Order Dated 03.12.2007 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) For The Ay. 2003-04. 2. At The Outset, We Note That This Tribunal Had Dismissed This Appeal By An Ex-Parte Order Qua Assessee On 21.06.2022 Which Has Been Recalled By This Tribunal By Order Dated 24.04.2023 (Ma. No.66/Mum/2023).

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 250

Shankar Agarwal HUF, Purulia vs. ITO, WD-3(4), Purulia

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

ITA 1072/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1072/Kol/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shankar Agarwal Huf............................................…...……………....Appellant Main Road, Purulia, West Bengal – 723101. [Pan: Aaxhs2225L] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(4), Kolkata.........…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. J. Bhide, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.08.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Brought Our Attention To The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) To Submit That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Solely For Technical Reason That The Complete Copy Of The Assessment Order Has Not Been Attached & That Some Pages Of The Assessment Order Are Missing. In Particular, Page No.3 Of The Assessment Order Is Not Attached & Page No.17 Of The Assessment Order Is Blank. The Ld. Cit(A), On This Ground Alone, Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 250

Pradeep Kumar, Ranchi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 9/RAN/2023[2019-20]Status: PendingITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

Surendra Kumar Agarwal(HUF), Ranchi vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Ranchi

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 8/RAN/2023[2017-18]Status: PendingITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

Pramod Kumar Barnwal, Deoghar vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle-3, Deoghar

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 7/RAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

M/S. Atibir Industries Co. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Dhanbad

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 6/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

M/S. Atibir Industries Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Dhanbad

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 5/RAN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

Cepl-Eicc Joint Venture, Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, the application for early hearing stands dismissed

ITA 4/RAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradita Nos.3-9/Ran/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2020-21 Md. Tasin........................…………………..……...………………….……Appellant College Road, Simdega, Jharkhand-835223. [Pan: Aczpt3010E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi………..……...................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11, 2023 Application For Early Hearing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Application Dated 06.11.2023 Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Early Hearing Of Their Appeals In It(Ss) No.3- 9/Ran/2023. The Said Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) 2. We Have Perused The Application. We Find That In The Application, The Assessee Has Merely Stated That It Has A Fair Case On Merits, However, There Is No Mention Of Any Sufficient Cause For Fixing These Appeals Out Of Turn On An Early Date. The Hearing In Ranchi Bench Is Conducted Regularly Through Virtual Mode From Kolkata Bench Of The Tribunal. We, Therefore, Do Not Find Any Reason To Break The Queue & Fix These Matters For Early Hearing Without Any Justified Cause & In The Absence

Section 250

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg.) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 95/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.95/Kol/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd…………..........................……....Appellant 4B, Little Russel Street, Kolkata- 700071. [Pan: Aabcg0816E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 30, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 08, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.01.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. Ci.T.(A) On 03.01.2023 Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T.(A) Was Wrong In Confirming The Disallowance Towards Employees Contribution Towards

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 37