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

Lokesh, Hapur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(5), Hapur

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

ITA 2399/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.2399/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2012-13) Smt. Lokesh (W/O Boby Singh) L/H Boby Singh, 136, Tehsil Chopla, Near Water Tank, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur, Up 245205 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Axgps-1907-F बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(5), Meerut Road, Adarash Nagar Colony, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Madhuban Colony, Up 245101 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 09/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 08.03.2024, For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. A Perusal Of The Impugned Order Reveals That The Cit(A) Had Issued Notices To The Assessee On Four Occasions On Email Address Provided By The Assessee/Appellant But There Was No Response From The Assessee Side. Hence, The Cit(A) Dismissed Appeal For Non-Prosecution. It Is No More Res Integra That The Cit(A) Has No Power To Dismiss Appeal For Non-Prosecution [Re. Cit Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (Huf) 69 Taxmann.Com 407 (Bom)]. The Provisions Of Section 250 R.W.S 251 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act')

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 250

Power and Instrumentation (Gujarat) Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Circle 3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1212/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1212/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Power & Instrumentation The Acit बनाम/ (Gujarat) Ltd. Circle-3(3)(1) V/S. 12, Sunshin Industrial Estate Ahmedabad – 390 014 Rakhial, Ahmedabad – 380 023 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccp 4292 Q (अपीलाथ&/ Appellant) ('( यथ&/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07/05/2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], Upholding The Order Of Rectification Dated 23-11-2021 Under Section 154 Of The Act For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Ao"].

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250