M/S DAZZLE DEALERS P LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL, INDORE, INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 45/IND/2018Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 May 20195 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s order, finding no infirmity in dismissing the appeals as not maintainable due to the outstanding tax on the returned income. No evidence was presented to show the tax had been paid.

What were the facts?

The assessees filed appeals before the CIT(A) against orders of the AO. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals in limine, holding them not maintainable due to non-payment of tax on the returned income.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal is maintainable before the CIT(A) when the tax on the returned income has not been paid in full, despite the appellant claiming paucity of funds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Respondent: Shri R.S. Ambedkar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.05.2019Pronounced: 06.05.2019

Heard together (6 matters)

ITA Nos.43/Ind/2018
ITA Nos.44/Ind/2018
ITA Nos.45/Ind/2018
ITA Nos.46/Ind/2018
ITA Nos.191/Ind/2018
ITA Nos.192/Ind/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R

PER SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM

1.

This group of six appeals is directed against the different orders of ld. CIT(A)-III, Indore dated 31.10.2017/15.12.2017 on the following common grounds of appeal

s: “1. That, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is erroneous, unjust and contrary to the facts of the case.

2. That, the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the grounds raised by the appellant on merits.

[ITA Nos.43 to 46/Ind/2018 & & 192/Ind/2018] [M/s. Eminent Suppliers P. Ltd. and others, Dist. Dhar]

3. That, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions of section 249(4) of the Income Tax Act without considering the material fact that the appellant was passing through acute paucity of funds.

4.

That, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have provided further opportunity to make payment of tax on admitted income before deciding the appeal.” 2. Notices for hearing on 06.5.2019 i.e. today were issued to the assessees at the address given in the Form No.36. Despite this, nobody represented the assessees today. Ld. Sr. DR relied on the orders of the ld. CIT(A).

3.

On perusal of the material available on record, we find that ld. CIT(A) found that the tax on the returned income for which the appeals have been filed has not been paid in full. A report was called from the JCIT-(Central), Indore and it was reported that tax is still outstanding for the return filed originally u/s 139(1) and also in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals treating the same as not maintainable on account of non- payment of outstanding tax on returned income. Even before us, there is no evidence suggesting that the outstanding tax was paid

[ITA Nos.43 to 46/Ind/2018 & & 192/Ind/2018] [M/s. Eminent Suppliers P. Ltd. and others, Dist. Dhar] on the returned income. Earlier vide order dated 30.4.2019 in group assessees’ appeals i.e. IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 3/Ind/2018 and others, the same view was taken by this Tribunal. In view of these facts, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the ld. CIT(A). Same are confirmed. 4. Accordingly, appeals filed by the assessees are dismissed. Order was pronounced in the open court on 06.05.2019.

More judgments on Section 249(4)

All 251 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →