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

Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara, Porbandar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4), Porbandar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is partly allowed

ITA 1097/RJT/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1097/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ] Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara, Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4) G Karavad Ni Dhar, Wadi Vistar At Vs. Porbandar Gujarat 360590 Adwana Ta/Di Porbandar Jamnagar Gujarat- 360590 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Brppk0472D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 16.04.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, Dated 06.12.2019. 2. When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee At The Outset Submitted That Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Belatedly By 430 Days. The Assessee Has Moved A Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Requesting The Bench To Condone The Delay, In Filing Appeal. The Learned Counsel Therefore, Adverted My Attention To The Affidavit Filed In This Regard Citing Reasons For Condonation Of Delay Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Samat Khimabhai Sisodiya, Veraval vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Junagadh

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1059/RJT/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1059/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 ] Samat Khimabhai Sisodiya, Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Prop. A One Transport Yamuna Junagadh, Gujarat-362001 Vs. Market, Junagadh Road, Near Byepass, Veraval, Gujarat-362266 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bkrps0894L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 01.06.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 28.12.2019. 2. When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee, At The Outset Submitted That The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Belatedly. The Ld. Counsel, Adverted My Attention To The Affidavit Filed In This Regard Citing Reasons For Condonation Of Delay & Urged For A Benign View & Sought Condonation Of Delay Of 7 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. However, Learned Dr For The Samat Khimabhai Sisodiya

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 120(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Pritiben Pravinchandra Palan, Rajkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Rajkot

In the result, both appeals filed by the different assessees in ITA

ITA 800/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 799/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Parulben Jerambhai Parsana, Income Tax Officer, Tirupati-7 "Manglam", Vs. Ward-2(2)(3), Bh. Malharhall Nr. Bram Aaykar Bhavan, Samaj, Rajkot, Gujarat-360004 Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aizpp0758R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. /Ita No. 800/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Pritiben Pravinchandra Palan, The Assistant Commissioner Of Block No. 109, Puskardham Vs. Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Rajkot. Society, University Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agbpp3207C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69ASection 80G