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

Nemchand Khetshi Dedhia, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), Mumbai

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

ITA 1871/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1871/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Nemchand Khetshi Dedhia बिधम/ Cit(A) Row House No. 4, Shree Income Tax Department, Vs. Tilak Complex, Eksar Road, National Faceless Appeal Devki Nagar, Borivli West, Centre (Nfac), Delhi. Mumbai-400103, Maharashtra, India. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd3444K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Mr. Chetan Kacha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/ Nfac, Delhi Dated 28.06.2022 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Revenue Reads As Under: - “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Passed An Order U/S 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 28.06.2022 Having Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1043629976(1) Dismissing The Grounds Of Appeal & Thereby Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering The Submissions Made By The Appellant. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Grounds Of Appeal & Thereby Dismissing The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Ao (I.E. Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Order Passed By The Ld. Ao) U/S 143(3) Dated 22.12.2018, Wherein He Has (I) Made An Addition Of Rs.34,00,000/- U/S 68 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of The Cash

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Chetan Kacha (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 156Section 234BSection 250Section 68

Anushree Giri Karan, Midnapore vs. ACIT, Cir. -27(2), Haldia

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

ITA 291/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 291/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anushree Giri Karan A.C.I.T., Circle-27(2), Haldia Contai-I Vs Serpur Etwaribar Contai Midnapore – 721401 Pan : Ainpg8764G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit (D/R) सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/09/2022 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 (Nfac), (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 08/04/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At The Outset The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That, The Assessee Could Not Get A Fair Opportunity To Plead Before The Ld. Cit(A) Due To Various Covid Protocols, Which Prevented The Assessee To Co-Ordinate With Its Authorised Representative To File Necessary Submission. Prayer Was Made To Restore The Issue Raised In The Instant Appeal To The Ld. Cit(A) For Fresh Adjudication, After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. CIT (D/R)
Section 115BSection 250