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

Swati Sharma, Dehradnu vs. DCIT, C.C. Dehradun, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 39/DDN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Swati Sharma Vs Dcit H.No.-262, Sunderwala, Central Circle, Raipur, Dehradun Dehradun Uttarakhand -248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Dknps2561C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.11.2025 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Noida [“Ld. Cit(A)”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 22.03.2024 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Based On The Documents Found During The Course Of Search Carried Out In The Case Of Shri Krishna Sharma & Smt. Sheetal Sharma On 02.02.2022, Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act, Since As Per Seized Documents Titled As Page 6 & 7 Of Annexure A-2, It Is Found That Assessee Has Purchased A Property For A Total Consideration Of Inr 47.00 Lacs & Payments Of Inr 32.00 Lacs Was Made Through Cheque & Inr 15.00 Lacs Was Paid In Cash. Accordingly, Ao Passed The Reassessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 U/S 147 By Making Addition Of Inr 15.00 Lacs Being Cash Payment As Undisclosed Investment U/S 69B R.W.S. 115Bb Of The Act & The Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 20,88,840/-.

Section 147Section 250Section 69B

Renuka Grover, Dehradun vs. DCIT/ACIT, Dehradun

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 114/DDN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Renuka Grover Vs Dcit/Acit 175, Block-Aa, Karanpur, Central Circle, Dehradun Dehradun Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Amvpg2702Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri K.K. Juneja, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amar Pal, Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.01.2026 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Noida [“Ld. Cit(A)”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Based On The Documents Found During The Course Of Search Carried Out In The Case Of Shri Krishna Sharma & Smt. Sheetal Sharma On 02.02.2022, Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act, Since As Per Seized Documents Titled As Page 6 & 7 Of Annexure A-2, It Is Found That Assessee Has Purchased A Property For A Total Consideration Of Inr 26.00 Lacs & Payments Of Inr 20.00 Lacs Was Made Through Cheque & Inr 6.00 Lacs Was Paid In Cash. Accordingly, Ao Passed The Reassessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 U/S 147 By Making Addition Of Inr 6.00 Lacs Being Cash Payment As Undisclosed Investment U/S 69B R.W.S. 115Bb Of The Act & The Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 9,14,880/-.

Section 147Section 250Section 69B