Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
(PHYSICAL HEARING) िनधा�रतीक�ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri. Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A. राज�वक�ओरसे/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक�तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13.11.2024 उदघोषणाक�तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.12.2024 आदेश/Order The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the orderpassed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi dated 29.09.2023 (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” for the Assessment Year:2017- 18.The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine for non deposit of advance tax.
Vishal Kumar Bhargav v. ITO 2 2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to appeal opening Form 35, which was filed before the ld. CIT(A),to submit that in column no. 8,the assessee inadvertently mentioned that it had not deposited the tax. The ld. Counsel, however, has invited my attention at page no. 40 of the paper book to show that the assessee, in fact, has duly deposited the due taxes. The ld. counsel has further submitted that even this fact has also been brought to the attention of the ld. CIT(A).However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering of the aforesaid facts.
In view of the aforesaid submissions of the assessee, the dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A) is limine, cannot be held to be justified. The impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside, and the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.