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

Jitendra Singh, Kanpur vs. I.T.O.-1(3(5), Kanpur

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

ITA 791/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 May 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2014-15 Jitendra Singh, Vs Ito-3(5), 107/2, Babu Purwa Colony, Kidwai Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh Pan: Cvxps1754F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Jitendra Singh (Assessee) Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.05.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Wherein The Ld. Cit(A), Vide His Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 11.09.2025, Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Order Under Section 154 For The A.Y. 2014-15 Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer On 22.07.2021. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That On Facts & In Law The Impugned Order Dated 11.09.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law & Void-Ab-Initio. 2. That The Facts & In Law The Cit(Appeals) Have Erred In Passing The Impugned Appellate Order Without Considering The Request Of The Appellant That The Original Appeal Filed On 15.09.2019 For The Same A.Y. 2014-15 U/S 147/143(3) Of The I.T. Act, 1961, Before Cit(Appeals) Nfac Is Pending For Order So The Rectification Order U/S 154 By The A.O. For Enhancing The Demand Not Justified In Natural Justice. 3. That On Facts & In Law The Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Not Follow The Provision U/S 115Bbe Properly As Per Law Of Income Tax So, The Rectification Process U/S 154 Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Sh. Jitendra Singh (Assessee)For Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

Income Tax Officer, Hisar vs. Deepak, Hisar

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4791/DEL/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2026

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ito Vs Deepak Aaykar Bhawan, M/S. Neno Computer, Sector-14, Hisar, Near Pcsd School, Hansi, Hisar, Haryana Haryana-125033 Pan-Amypd4928Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Pratham Kindra, Adv. Date Of Hearing 16.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.05.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 09.06.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2012-13/10169880 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2022 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & No Return Of Income Was Filed In The Year Under Appeal. As Per Information Available With The Ao In Itb Portal, There Were Deposits Of Cash In The Bank Accounts Of More Than Inr 14 Crores & Tds U/S 194H Of Inr 49,040/- & Since No Return Was Filed Therefore, The Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act After Regarding The Reasons & Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued. However, The Assessee Has Not Complied With Any Of The Notice Nor Filed Return Of Income In Response To Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Therefore, The Ao Has Passed The Re-Assessment Order By Making Additions Of The Entire Transactions Appearing In Itba Module Of Inr 14,08,85,390/-.

Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 250