BALBIR SINGH,KHERA KHURD vs. ITO, WARD 36(1), DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061238278(1) dated 21.02.2024, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short
“the Act”).
Case called twice. None appear at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)/NFAC has declined to admit the assessee’s lower appeal in limine on account of the fact that he had not paid the self- assessment tax u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act.
Faced with this situation, the Revenue could hardly rebut the clinching facts emanating from the case file that neither Balbir Singh
2
the assessee had filed any return in response to section 148
notice nor had he ever admitted any advance tax liability which could held not to have been paid so as to attract section 249(4)(b) of the Act. This is further coupled with the fact that the learned lower appellate authority as well has not even quantified the assessee’s precise advance tax amount as well.
We, therefore, are of the considered view that the assessee’s instant appeal deserve to be restore back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication as per law on merits within three effective opportunities. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. Order Pronounced in the open court on 02/01/2025. (M. Balaganesh) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 02/01/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*