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

Kashmiri Lal Constructions Pvtltd, Uttarakhand vs. DCIT Central Circle Haldwani, Haldwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 69/DDN/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun25 May 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Kashmiri Lal Constructions Vs Dcit Pvt.Ltd., 825, Gandhi Chowk, Central Circle Ranikhet Sadar Bazar, Haldwani S.O. Ranikhet, Almora, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand-263645 Pan-Aacck1932E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Kalrav Mehratra, Adv., Shri Puspak Garg, Ca & Shri Shubham Bansal, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Dated 19.12.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Lucknow-3 [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit (A), Haldwani/10004/2017-18 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 27.03.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Years 2015-16. 2. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Prayed That The Assessee Does Not Want To Pursue The Present Appeal Therefore, The Captioned Appeal May Be Permitted To Be Withdrawn. An Application Dated 25.05.2026 Filed By The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Company, Is Also Placed On Record. The Relevant Contents Of The Application Are Reproduced As Under:- “Kindly Refer To The Appeal Filed By The Appellant In The Case Of Kashmiri Lal Constructions Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, Haldwani Bearing Ita No. 69/Ddn/2026 For Assessment Year 2015- 2016, Which Is Pending For Adjudication Before The Hon'Ble Bench. The Appellant Respectfully Submits That The Appellant Does Not Wish To Pursue The Aforesaid Appeal Further & Therefore Seeks Permission Of The Hon'Ble Bench To Withdraw The Same. It Is, Therefore, Most Respectfully Prayed That The Aforesaid Appeal May Kindly Be Treated As Withdrawn.”

Section 143(3)Section 250

Chetna, Sector-C vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Ram Tirath Marg

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 355/LKW/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2019-20 Chetna, Vs Assistant Director Of Income Tax Aliganj, Lucknow Pan: Aaatc1696A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Akshay Agarwal, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl /Jcit-3 (Appeals) Ahmedabad Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 16.01.2026, Wherein The Ld. First Appellate Authority Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cpc Under Section 154 Of The Act For The A.Y. 2019-20, Passed On 14.02.2024. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Without Considering The Facts Of The Case. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Wrongly Rejected The Exemption U/S 12A Saying That There Was No Valid & Timely Submitted Form 10B & Form No 10 On Record, Even The Form 10B (Audit Report) Was Submitted On 31/10/2019 Within The Prescribed Time & Form 10B (Audit Report) Available On Income Tax Portal. 3. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Has Also Not Given Any Finding About The Calculation Of Tax On Income Over Expenditure As Aop In Case Of Rejection Of Exemption U/S 12A. 4. That The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Against The Law & Principle Of Natural Justice. 1 A.Y. 2019-20 Chetna

For Appellant: Sh. Akshay Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250