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

Yogesh Jagannath Satav, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), Pune

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

ITA 2022/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2022/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Yogesh Jagannath Satav, The Income Tax Officer, Fadai Chowk, Nagar Road, Ward – 12(4), Pune Wagholi, Taluka-Haveli, Vs. Pune-412207 Pan : Bbtps3761B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Digambar Surwase Department By : Shri Manish Mehta Date Of Hearing : 20-01-2026 Date Of 28-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.06.2025 Of The Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai [“Addl./Jcit(A)”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) (National Faceless Assessment Centre) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of Appellant Even Though Form-5 Under Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Was Not Issued The Appellant By Jurisdictional Commissioner Of Income Tax. The Appellant Prays That Appeal May Be Restored Back To File To Of Cit(A) For Hearing The Appeal On Merits. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Passed Under Section 250 By Cit(A) Nfac, Delhi Dismissing The Appeal Is Wholly Illegal, Unlawful & Against The Principal Of Natural Justice. The Appellant Prays For Just, Fair & Appropriate Relief. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Cit(A) Nfac Erred In Not Passing A Speaking Order On The Grounds Raised By The Appellant Before Nafc. The Appellant Prays For Just, Fair & Appropriate Relief. 4. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellant Prays That Appeal Deemed To Be Withdrawn, May Be Revived.

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

DCIT, Circle 7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Sarat Chatterjee & Co. Vsp Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 749/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2022-23 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata ………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Sarat Chatterjee & Co. Vsp Pvt. Ltd…….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Vasundhara, 9Th Floor, Sarat Bose Road, L R Sarani, Kol-20.. [Pan: Aadcs6139A] Appearances By: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rishav Jain, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 159 Days & The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Going Over The Said Petition, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind The Delay & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80I

Srikrishan Agarwal, Barfong vs. DCIT, Circle 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2625/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2623 To 2625/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2017-18 Srikrishan Agarwal…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aoopa9018C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.08.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2623/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. At The Outset, We Notice That The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 12 Days & The Assessee Has Filed Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. Considering The Same & Shortness Of The

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250

Srikrishan Agarwal, Barfong vs. DCIT, Circle 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2624/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2623 To 2625/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2017-18 Srikrishan Agarwal…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aoopa9018C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.08.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2623/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. At The Outset, We Notice That The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 12 Days & The Assessee Has Filed Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. Considering The Same & Shortness Of The

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250

Srikrishan Agarwal, Ravangla vs. DCIT, Circle 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2623/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2623 To 2625/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2017-18 Srikrishan Agarwal…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aoopa9018C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.08.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2623/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. At The Outset, We Notice That The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 12 Days & The Assessee Has Filed Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. Considering The Same & Shortness Of The

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250

Shankar Agarwal, Sikkim vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2557/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2555 To 2557/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shankar Agarwal…..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aikpa5935E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.09.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed Income Tax Return For The Year Under Consideration. In This Case, Assessment Order U/S 144 Has Been Passed Assessing Total Income Of Rs.27,69,030/-. Thereafter, Notice U/S 148 Was

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250

Shankar Agarwal, Sikkim vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(2), East Sikkim

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2556/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2555 To 2557/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shankar Agarwal…..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aikpa5935E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.09.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed Income Tax Return For The Year Under Consideration. In This Case, Assessment Order U/S 144 Has Been Passed Assessing Total Income Of Rs.27,69,030/-. Thereafter, Notice U/S 148 Was

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250

Shankar Agarwal, Sikkim vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2555/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2555 To 2557/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shankar Agarwal…..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69. [Pan: Aikpa5935E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Gangtok………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 19, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: All The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 15.09.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.2555/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed Income Tax Return For The Year Under Consideration. In This Case, Assessment Order U/S 144 Has Been Passed Assessing Total Income Of Rs.27,69,030/-. Thereafter, Notice U/S 148 Was

Section 10Section 144Section 148Section 250