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

Civil & Electrical Projects Constructing Co (India) Private Limited.., Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(!), Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 29/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 29/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Civil & Electrical Projects Constructing Co.(I) Pvt. Ltd., Shaan Education Society, Sr.1/1-1, Next To Bramha Estate, Kondhwa, Pune – 411 048 . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan: Aaefc3943Q बनाम / V/S Income Tax Officer, 1(1), . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/07/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06/07/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Of The Assessee For Assessment Year [For Short ‘Ay’] 2012-13 Is Assailed Against The First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Dt. 15/11/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Emanated Out Of Penalty Order [For Short ‘Po’] Of Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Dt. 25/03/2022. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 238/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.237&238/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd...….........................……...…..….. Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia, Kolkata-700046. [Pan: Aaccn4806C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..................................….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 05, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 06.03.2023 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’). Since Common Issues Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.237/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.237/Kol/2023 – The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Relating To Disallowance Of Rs.7,73,14 356/- U/S 35Ad Being Capital Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Specified Business.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 35A

Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1)., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 237/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.237&238/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd...….........................……...…..….. Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia, Kolkata-700046. [Pan: Aaccn4806C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..................................….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 05, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 06.03.2023 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’). Since Common Issues Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.237/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.237/Kol/2023 – The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Relating To Disallowance Of Rs.7,73,14 356/- U/S 35Ad Being Capital Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Specified Business.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 35A