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

Ramesh Kumar Damani, Mumbai vs. Circle 32(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 6659/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Bijayananda Prusethramesh Kumar Damani Circle 32(1), Mumbai 403, 30D, Usha Kunj, Juhi Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Tara Road, Juhu, Koliwada, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai -400049 Vs. Mumbai - 400051 Pan/Gir No. Aftpd2293L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assesseeby Shri Mukul Moondra (Virtually Present) Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr Ar Date Of Hearing 14.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 29.08.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac)/Cit(A) For The Assessment Year. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Disallowance Of Tax Credit Of 1 Rs. 40,23,539.00 Despite The Credit Being Duly Corroborated By Form 16, Correctly Claimed In The Return Of Income & Fully Reflected In The Assessee'S Form 26As 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Sustaining The Disallowance Of 2 Exemptions/ Deductions Aggregating To Rs. 7,38,980, Without Considering That All Requisite Supporting Documents & Bank Statement, Were Duly Furnished & Placed On Record.

Section 234ASection 250

Thahekhu Vill.B/C Fc (Ncbc), Dimapur vs. Ward 2(3) Exemption Guwahati, Guwahati

In the result, ITA Nos.59/GTY/2026 & 60/GTY/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 60/GTY/2026[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 May 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraita Nos. 59 & 60/Gty/2026 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Thahekhuv Vill.B/C Fc (Ncbc).………………….………...Appellant Thahekhu Vill Po & Ps Dimapur Nagaland-797112 [Pan: Aactt9207A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Exemption, Guwahati…..………………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances By: Shri Kishor Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 19, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’], Both Dated 18.10.2025, For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’], Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders Framed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Dated 24.02.2025 & 21.02.2025. Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Except Variation In Figures, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69ASection 80G

Thahekhu Vill.B/C Fc (Ncbc), Dimapur vs. Ward 2(3) Exemption Guwahati, Guwahati

In the result, ITA Nos.59/GTY/2026 & 60/GTY/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 59/GTY/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 May 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraita Nos. 59 & 60/Gty/2026 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Thahekhuv Vill.B/C Fc (Ncbc).………………….………...Appellant Thahekhu Vill Po & Ps Dimapur Nagaland-797112 [Pan: Aactt9207A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Exemption, Guwahati…..………………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances By: Shri Kishor Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 19, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’], Both Dated 18.10.2025, For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’], Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders Framed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Dated 24.02.2025 & 21.02.2025. Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Except Variation In Figures, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69ASection 80G

Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited, Guwahati vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Guwahati

In the result, both the ITA Nos

ITA 92/GTY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 May 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraita No. 91 /Gty/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent To Dto Office, Nh 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [Pan: Aabcg7254Q] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…..………………..Respondent Assam-781005 Ita No. 92 /Gty/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent To Dto Office, Nh 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [Pan: Aadcg7819B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…………….....…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances By: Shri Ramesh Goenka, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 19, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Two Different Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31.03.2025 & 13.02.2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13, Passed U/S 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’], Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders Framed U/S 144 Of The Act, Both Dated 27.03.2015. Ita Nos.91 & 92/Gty/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Except Variation In Figures & Names Of The Assessee, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. For The Purpose Of Adjudication, We First Take Up

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited, Guwahati vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle - 1, Guwahati

In the result, both the ITA Nos

ITA 91/GTY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 May 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraita No. 91 /Gty/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent To Dto Office, Nh 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [Pan: Aabcg7254Q] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…..………………..Respondent Assam-781005 Ita No. 92 /Gty/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent To Dto Office, Nh 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [Pan: Aadcg7819B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…………….....…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances By: Shri Ramesh Goenka, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 19, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Two Different Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31.03.2025 & 13.02.2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13, Passed U/S 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’], Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders Framed U/S 144 Of The Act, Both Dated 27.03.2015. Ita Nos.91 & 92/Gty/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Except Variation In Figures & Names Of The Assessee, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. For The Purpose Of Adjudication, We First Take Up

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250