YASHASHREE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

PDF
ITA 997/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 February 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)3 pages

No AI summary yet for this case.

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

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Hearing: 28.02.2024Pronounced: 28.02.2024

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the

order of CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated

27-06-2023 u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for the

Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of

the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We, therefore,

ITA No.997/PUN/2023

proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee and after

hearing the ld. DR.

3.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Dy. Commissioner of

Income Tax, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad issued an intimation u/s 200A

r.w.s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for the

assessment year 2015-16 levying late fee for four Assessment Years

namely; 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 under the

provisions of section 234E at Rs.21,600/-. It was stated that the

appellant had failed to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement

within the time prescribed in section 200(3)/206C(3) of the Act and

made liable for late fees. Being aggrieved by the said intimation, an

appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order, chose

to dismiss the appeal.

4.

Being aggrieved by the above decision of the NFAC, the

appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal.

5.

After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the relevant material on

record, we find that the assessee had filed the present appeal

impugning letter dt. 09-08-2018 intimating demand issued by the

ITO, TDS-3. The appellant filed the appeal against the intimation

of pending demand which is not an appealable order u/s.246(1A) of

ITA No.997/PUN/2023

the Act. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal as

not appealable. Accordingly, appeal of the appellant is dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 28th day of February, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 28th February, 2024 Satish

आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A) concerned िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune

YASHASHREE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE | BharatTax