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

Parulben Jerambhai Parsana, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Rajkot

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

ITA 799/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

Shree Harikrushna Velfare Trust, Bhachau vs. The ITO Exemption Ward 1, Rjakot, Rajkot

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

ITA 677/RJT/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 677/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 ] Shree Harikrushna Velfare Trust, The Ito (Exemption) 1 Swaminarayan Gurukul, Ward (1), Rajkot. Vs. National Highway, Bhachau, It Office, New Aayakar Gujarat-370140 Bhawan, Vatiaka, Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagts6149E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hinal Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17, 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 21.01.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 03.01.2018. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee In Ita No.677/Rjt/2026 For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Barred By Limitation By 30 Days. The Assessee Has Moved A Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Requesting The Bench To Condone The Delay

For Appellant: Shri Hinal Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

Malhar Nitin Bhuptani, Rajkotq vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1054/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1054/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Malhar Nitin Bhuptani, Assistant Commissioner Of Ramashrya Yoginiketan Income Tax Circle-2(1), Vs. Plot, Nirmala School Road, Aykar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Rajkot, Gujarat-360001. Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Apfpb8751B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am : Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section-250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 11.07.2026 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act, Dated 20.01.2025. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.1,40,000, Being The Amount Of Donation Made To Political Parties, Which Was Claimed As A Deduction Under Section 80Ggc Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Disallowance Is Unjustified, Contrary To The Provisions Of The Act & Liable To Be Deleted.”

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 29ASection 80G

Kamlesh Shashikantbhai Dave, Morbi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2(2)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1045/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1045/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2024-25 ] Kamlesh Shashikantbhai Dave, Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2)(1), Dv Raval Arts & Commerce Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), Vs. College Village-Halvad- Ayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Dist. Morbi, Gujarat 363330 Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acbpd0204E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri R.D. Lalchandani, Ld. Ar & Kashish Pamnani, Ld. Ars Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: Order :: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2024-25, 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 15.07.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 22.02.2026. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Confirming The Disallowance Of 11,00,000, Being The Amount Of Donation Made To Political Parties, Which Was Claimed As A Deduction Under Section 80Ggc Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Disallowance Is Unjustified, Contrary To The Provisions Of The Act & Liable To Be Deleted.”

For Appellant: Shri R.D. Lalchandani, Ld. AR and Kashish Pamnani, Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 29ASection 80G

Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs. ITO Ward 1, Junagadh

In the result, both appeals (ITA No

ITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 836 & 837/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21 ] Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Ito Ward 1, Junagadh, Nandanvan Patel Chowk, Junagadh, बनाम/ Dargahvali Sheri Manavadar Gujarat 362001 Vs. Junagadh, Gujarat-362630 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Acbpm4826B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2019-20 & 2020-21, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 24.09.2025 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148BSection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A