The section fixes who may appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) and against what. The right belongs to any assessee, deductor or collector aggrieved by one of the orders it lists.
The list covers: an order of a Joint Commissioner under section 231(4)(b); an order against the assessee where he denies his liability to be assessed; an intimation under section 270(1) or 399(1) where the adjustments made are objected to; an assessment order under section 270(10), except one passed in pursuance of Dispute Resolution Panel directions or an order referred to in section 274(12) or 271, where the assessee objects to the income assessed, the tax determined, the loss computed or the status; an order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 279 with the same Dispute Resolution Panel and section 274(12) exceptions, or under section 283; an order under section 169(3)(a); an order under section 287 or 288 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund, or refusing a claim under either, except an order referred to in section 274(12); an order under section 306 treating the assessee as agent of a non-resident; orders under sections 313(2) or (4), 315, 398, 431 and 434; an order imposing or enhancing a penalty under Chapter XXI; penalties under sections 412 and 298(2); an order under section 294(1)(c); and, under clause (r), an order of an Assessing Officer in the case of such person or class of persons as the Board may direct, having regard to the nature of the cases, the complexities involved and other relevant considerations.
Why it is there
A right of first appeal has to be defined by the order appealed against, not by the grievance, or every step in an assessment would be separately challengeable. The list does that work, and the exclusions do the opposite — an order on Dispute Resolution Panel directions, or an order referred to in section 274(12), goes elsewhere. Extending the right to a deductor and a collector recognises that the person aggrieved by a short-deduction intimation is often not the assessee at all.
Who it applies to
An assessee aggrieved by one of the listed orders
A deductor or collector objecting to adjustments in an intimation under section 270(1) or 399(1), or aggrieved by an order under section 398
A person treated as the agent of a non-resident by an order under section 306
A person on whom a penalty is imposed or enhanced under Chapter XXI, or imposed under section 412 or 298(2)
What this means in practice
The list is the gateway, and the exclusions inside it do the most work: an assessment made on Dispute Resolution Panel directions, and an order referred to in section 274(12), sit outside clauses (d) and (e), so the remedy for those lies elsewhere. Clause (b) is the broadest entry — denial of liability to be assessed — and is often the route where an order does not obviously fit another clause. Because deductors and collectors are named in the opening words, an appeal against a section 399(1) intimation does not depend on the appellant being the assessee whose income is in question.
An example
Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.
A deductor receives an intimation under section 399(1) raising a short-deduction demand and objects to the adjustment made in it. Clause (c) gives it a right of appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) in its own name, without being an assessee in the assessment sense. By contrast, a company assessed under section 270(10) in pursuance of Dispute Resolution Panel directions has no appeal here at all — clause (d) excepts such an order, as it excepts an order referred to in section 274(12) or 271.
Where you meet this section
This is the section you check the moment an order or intimation arrives, because it decides whether a first appeal lies to the Commissioner (Appeals) at all. Every appeal memorandum before that authority is founded on one of its clauses, and the Department's first objection is usually that the order appealed against is not among them.
The words themselves
Any assessee or any deductor or any collector, aggrieved by any of the following orders, may appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals)
Section 357, Income-tax Act, 2025.
an order against the assessee where the assessee denies his liability to be assessed under this Act
Section 357(b), Income-tax Act, 2025.
except an order passed in pursuance of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel or an order referred to in section 274(12) or 271
Section 357(d), Income-tax Act, 2025.
What people get wrong
Assuming every assessment order is appealable here. Clause (d) excepts an order on Dispute Resolution Panel directions and one referred to in section 274(12) or 271, and clause (e) carries the same exceptions for section 279 orders.
Thinking only an assessee may appeal. The opening words give the right to any assessee, deductor or collector.
Overlooking intimations. Clause (c) makes an intimation under section 270(1) or 399(1) appealable where the adjustments are objected to.
Looking for a special provision for penalties. Clause (n) covers any order imposing or enhancing a Chapter XXI penalty, and clauses (o) and (q) add sections 412 and 298(2).
Missing the residuary route in clause (r), which lets the Board direct that an Assessing Officer's orders in specified cases are appealable.
Assuming any rectification or amendment order is appealable. Clause (g) reaches only one that enhances the assessment, reduces a refund, or refuses a claim.
What this replaced
The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.
246A - Appealable orders before Commissioner (Appeals)
A notification is made under a power the Act gives and, within that power, is law. These too were made under the 1961 Act and are placed here by the department’s concordance.
Read this before you rely on it. Every decision below was decided under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It appears here because it is tagged to a 1961 provision that the department’s own mapping carries to section 357. That is an inference we have drawn, not a holding on the new section: where the words changed in the move, the reasoning may not survive. Treat this as the place to start looking, not as authority on the 2025 Act.
CIT v Kanpur Coal SyndicateSupreme Courttagged s.246A How wide are the first appellate authority's powers when it disposes of an appeal?
Aafreen Fatima Fazal Abbas Sayed v ACITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A I let the 30 days to appeal my 143(1) intimation lapse. Can I still go to the pcit under s.264?
Bhupendra Murji Shah v DCITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A Must you pay 20% while your first appeal is still undecided?
CIT v Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)High CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A You did not appear before the CIT(A). Can the appeal simply be dismissed for non-prosecution?
Chhatmull Agarwal v CITHigh Courttagged s.246A Can an assessee appeal against an addition he agreed to during the assessment?
Flipkart India Private Limited v ACITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A Did the 2016 Office Memorandum wipe out Instruction No. 1914 and its hardship tests?
Purnima Das v Union of IndiaHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A Your bank account was attached while the stay application was still pending. Was that lawful?
Raj Kumar Bothra v DCITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A CPC disallowed my late-deposited pf and esi under 143(1)(a). Was a summary adjustment even open to them?
Rajendra Kumar v ACITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A The CPC has adjusted my entire refund against a demand that is under appeal. Do I have to file a separate stay application before I can complain?
Saurav Chachra v CBDTHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.246A I have a stay on my demand and they still adjusted my refund against it. Can they do that?
Dixit Rice Mill v DCIT (CPC)ITATtagged s.246A Must an assessee first apply for rectification to CPC before appealing against a s.143(1) intimation?
Marmo Home v DCITITATtagged s.246A If I did not appeal the s.143(1) intimation, can I attack the same adjustment in the appeal against the s.143(3) order?
Orient Craft Ltd v DCITITATHelps departmenttagged s.246A I withdrew my appeal against the section 143(1) intimation because the case went into scrutiny. Can the Assessing Officer now rectify under section…
Revision: s.263 against you, s.264 for youtagged s.246A The Commissioner has issued a notice to revise my assessment. Is that different from my asking him to revise it?
What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.
