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

Income Tax Officer, Ward-Mahasamund, Mahasamund vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi Shrishrimal, Mahasamund

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 197/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.197/Rpr/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi Shrishrimal, Ward-Mahasamund, 31, M.B. Building, Gandhi Chowk, Chhattisgarh Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh Pan No. : Ajgps 0562 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Sh. Amit M. Jain, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Sh. Simran Bhullar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeals Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case Whether The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.3,12,98,657/- U/S 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Without Calling For Remand Report From The Ao On The Issue Of Unexplained Increase In Capital U/S 68 Of The Act. 2. Any Other Grounds That May Be Adduced At The Time Of Hearing. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Assessee Is An Individual Has Filed Her Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 30Th March, 2019, Showing A Total Income Of Rs.7,03,830/-. The Case Of Assessee Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Assessment Under E- Assessment Scheme, 2019 On The Issue Of Share Capital/Other Capital.

For Appellant: Sh. Amit M. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Simran Bhullar, CIT(DR)
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68

M/S. Angel Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kol, Kolkata

ITA 405/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 405/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Angel Infrabuild Private Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Limited Vs Kolkata 14, 3Rd Floor, Netajee Subhash Road Dalhousie Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aajca7353G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 28/03/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13, On The Following Grounds:- “1. For That The Assessment Order Passed By Ld. Ao & Confirmed By Ld. Cit (A) Is Arbitrary, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. For That The Assessment Order Being Served After 31.03.2015 Is Barred By Limitation For That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Ao In Assessing The Share Capital & Premium Of 1,51,00,000/- As Unexplained Cash Credit Merely For The Reason Of Non- Appearance Of The Share Applicants Whereas Otherwise There Were Sufficient Evidences On Records In Support Of The Identity, Capacity Of The Share Applicants & Genuineness Of The Transactions & All The Share

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

DCIT, Cir-1, Durgapur vs. Niranjan Mitra, Durgapur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 554/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 554/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur Niranjan Mitra Vs Room No. 106, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre Durgapur – 713216 [Pan: Acdpc6877A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Swagato Banerejee, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 23/09/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Admittedly The Tax Effect In This Revenue’S Appeal, Is Less Than Rs.50,00,000/-. In Circular No. 17/2019, Dt. 08/08/2019 Vide F. No. 279/ Misc. 142/2007-Itj(Pt.), The Cbdt Has Modified Circular No. 3 Of 2018 Dt. 11/07/2018. Further, The Cbdt In Its Circular F. No. 279/Misc./M-93/2018-Itj, Dt. 20/08/2019, Has Clarified That The Revised Monetary Limits, So Mentioned In Circular No. 17/2019 Is Applicable To All Pending Appeals. As Per These Circulars All The Revenue Appeals Filed Before The Itat, Having Tax Effect Of Less Than Rs.50,00,000/- Have To Treated As Withdrawn. It Will Be Pertinent To Reproduce The Relevant Portion Of The Said Circular As Follows:-

For Appellant: Shri Swagato Banerejee, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 250