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

Vikramkumar Bhavarlal Dave, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 828/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.828/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vikramkumar Bhavarlal Dave The Ito बनाम/ C-168, Shivam Duplex Ward-1(2)(2) V/S. Opp. Ambe School Vadodara – 390 007 Manjalpur Vadodara – 390 011 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Brqpd 7728 G (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prashant Upadhyay, Ca Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 07/11/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal, Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Of Rs.3,01,65,800/- On Account Of Bogus/Unexplained Expenditure. Vikramkumar Bhavarlal Dave Vs. Ito Asst.Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Upadhyay, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

Jivan Jyot Trust, Umreth vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Anand

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 697/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.697/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Jivan Jyot Trust The Ito बनाम/ 6, Yamuna Park Society Ward-1 V/S. C/O. Dr Mb Bhagat, Anand – 388 001 Ode Bazar Umreth – 388 220 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaaj 1506 F (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/112025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [Addl/Jcit(A) Mysore, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 14/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Is A Public Charitable Trust & Is Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) & Is Also Approved U/S.80G (5) Of The Act. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income (Itr) For Ay 2020-21 Jivan Jyot Trust Vs. Ito Asst.Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 80G