DILIP HIRALAL CHAUDHARI,NANDURBAR vs. ITO, WARD, DHULE

ITA 642/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 June 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)10 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 249(4)(b) requires payment of advance tax payable by the assessee, not necessarily on the assessed income. Since the assessee had paid tax on undisputed income through TCS, the appeal should not have been dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file an income tax return for AY 2017-18. The AO assessed income based on cash deposits, treating a portion as unexplained. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-payment of advance tax as required by Section 249(4)(b).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-payment of advance tax when the assessee had paid tax on undisputed income through TCS, and whether 'advance tax payable by him' refers to the assessee's calculation or the assessed income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(4)(b),Section 234B(1),Section 208,Section 209(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Hearing: 02.05.2024Pronounced: 05.06.2024

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.01.2024 passed by Ld CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1] The learned CIT(A) erred in not admitting the appeal on the ground that the assessee had not satisfied the condition of payment of advance tax as specified u/s 249(4)(b) without appreciating that the said condition was not applicable to the facts of the present case and therefore, the appeal ought to have been adjudicated on merits. 2] The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had already paid taxes on the total income of Rs.5,32,310 declared by

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 249(4)(b)

All 347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(4)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →