PARWATI BRICKS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-11(1), KOLKATA

Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member:

Parwati Bricks Pvt. Ltd. “1. (a). For that on the facts and circumstancs of the case, the Ld. CIT(a) was not justified in dismissing the appeal by wrongly applying the provisions of section 249(4) of the Income Tax Act. (b) For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in treating the appeal as "not admitted" and dismissed the same in limine.

2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order in gross violation of the principles of natural justice without providing any opportunity to place submissions on the merit of the case.

or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.”

2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal solely on the ground that the assessee has not paid advance tax as provided in Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. He submitted that this being the first year of incorporation, there was no liability to pay advance tax. He prayed that the issues on merits may be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication.

3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of lower authorities.

4. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material placed on record. We observe that the assessee is a private limited company incorporated on 14.09.2012. Assessment Year 2013-14 is the first year in which assessee is required to file income tax return. We observe that against the addition made by the Ld. AO under Section 69A of the Act at Rs. 3,49,32,400/-, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A). However, perusal of impugned order indicates that assessee’s appeal was not admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) by referring to Section 249(4)(b) of the Act and stating that the assessee had not paid an amount equal 2 Parwati Bricks Pvt. Ltd. to the amount of advance tax payable by him. We observe that Section 249(b)(4) of the Act reads as under: “(b) where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him.

5. From perusal of above, Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, we find that same is applicable for those assessee’s who have filed the return for preceding year and based on such returns if there is any advance tax liability the same needs to be paid even if return has not been submitted in case, the assessee desires to file the appeal. However, the present assessee is in its first year of incorporation and therefore, there could not be any liability to pay advance tax. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the appeal by invoking Section 249(4)(b) of the Act.

raised by the assessee on merits are allowed for statistical purposes.

7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 16th July, 2024.