M/S.SRUSHTI SANGAM ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, PANVEL, RAIGAD

Brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are, the assessee company is engaged in the business of builders and developers. For the assessment year under consideration, the 2 Srushti Sangam Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. assessee filed its return of income on 20th September 2012, declaring total income of ` 1,63,83,500. The assessment in case of the assessee was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 18th March 2015, determining the total income at ` 3,12,36,600. The variation between the income returned and income determined was due to couple of additions made under section 68 of the Act. The assessee challenged the additions made in the assessment order by filing an appeal before the first appellate authority.

The learned Commissioner (Appeals) noticing that the assessee has not discharged the admitted tax liability on the returned income of ` 1,63,83,600, called upon the assessee to explain why the appeal should not be dismissed in terms of section 249(4) of the Act. Though, the assessee furnished his reply claiming that it has paid the tax on the returned income, hence, the appeal should not be dismissed under section 249(4) of the Act, however, learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and relying upon certain judicial precedents dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine under section 249(4) of the Act alleging non–payment of admitted tax.

When the case was called for hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice of hearing issued through registered post with A/D. Considering the nature of dispute, we

We have heard the learned Departmental Representative and perused material on record. Undisputedly, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal in limine by exercising power under section 249(4) of the Act alleging non–payment of admitted tax. On perusal of grounds of appeal, more specifically Para– xix, Para–xx and Para–14(b) of grounds of appeal, it appears that the assessee claims to have paid the entire admitted tax liability. However, the assessee has neither appeared before us nor produced the relevant documentary evidence to demonstrate that the admitted tax liability on the income returned has been fully discharged. Therefore, considering assessee’s claim in the grounds of appeal that it has paid the admitted tax liability, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore all the issues raised in this appeal back to his file to enable the assessee in demonstrating before learned Commissioner (Appeals) with proper evidence that it has paid the admitted tax liability on the income returned by it for the impugned assessment year. After considering the evidences submitted by the assessee, learned Commissioner (Appeals) may decide the issue in accordance with law. Needless to mention learned Commissioner (Appeals) must provide reasonable opportunity

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 09.08.2019