“Section 249(4)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 249Section 249(4)(b)329 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 249(4)(b) is Hotel Sai Siddi (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (13 Taxmann.com 155), cited in 14 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 249(4)(b)

Hotel Sai Siddi (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

13 Taxmann.com 155 · 2011 · Reported

citing judgments

An assessee's appeal should be admitted if they incurred a loss and were therefore not liable to pay advance tax as required by section 249(4)(b). In such cases, the appeal should be decided on its merits by the CIT(A).

Vishnusharan Chandravanshi v. ITO

161 Taxmann.com 803 · 2024 · Reported

citing judgments

An assessee is not obligated to compute and pay advance tax under sections 208 and 209 if they have no taxable income. Consequently, an appeal should not be dismissed for non-payment of advance tax in such circumstances.

Judgments citing Section 249(4)(b)

Ushaben Prakashkumar Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Office, Ward-1(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 340/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year :2012-13 Ushaben Prakashkumar Shah Ito, Ward-1(3)(1) C/O. M.S. Chhajed & Co., Ca Vs Ahmedabad. “Kamal Shanti” Nr.Sardar Patel Statute Ahmedabad. Pan : Blrps 2392 J (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Chhajed, Ar Assessee By : Revenue By Shri Hrishikesh Hemant Patki, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/07/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 68

that no return of income was filed by the assessee and advance tax not paid; that therefore, in terms 2 of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act the appeal was held as un-admissible. The ld.counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee remained un-responsive before

Shri Sampat Kacharu Dhage, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1019/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)

submitted that the sole reason for dismissing the appeal of the assessee by LD CIT(A)/NFAC was non-payment in accordance with section 249(4)(b) of the IT Act. It was further clarified before the bench that as per the assessee his income was non-taxable & therefore ... perused the material available on the record. We are of the considered 5 opinion that the advance tax if any payable as per section 249(4)(b) of the IT Act is to be determined at the behest of the assessee. If there is no advance tax liability according

Danabhai Bharvad, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 844/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) In Turn Has Arisen From The Assessment Order Dated 28-11- 2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act 1961. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With Tribunal, Reads As Under:- “1. The Assessing Officer & Commissioner Appeal Have Erred In Law & In Facts, In Considering The Cash Deposit As Un-Explained Cash Deposit.

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)Section 250Section 28

amount on the assessed I.T.A No. 844/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No. 9 Danabhai Bharvad v. ITO income, keeping in view provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. The assessee has claimed before Ld. CIT(A) in the statement of fact(SOF) filed that the assessee ... However, the assessee was liable to file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 148. The language of Section 249(4)(b) is clear that when no return of income is filed by the tax-payer , then the appeal can only be admitted by ld. CIT(A) only when

Manoj Kumar Motwani, Betul Mp vs. Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax Department NFAC

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 151/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2013-14 Manoj Kumar Motwani, Acit, Prop. Neelam Store, Nfac, Lally Chowk, Delhi बनाम/ Kothi Bazar, Vs. Betul (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaupm8830E Assessee By Shri Rakesh Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2024

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 253(5)Section 69A

first-appeal. The CIT(A) treated assessee’s first-appeal as deficient on the footing of non-payment of tax as required by section 249(4)(b) and accordingly dismissed assessee’s appeal as non-admitted. Now, the assessee has come before us challenging the orders of lower-authorities. 4 ... addition of equal amount. In such a situation, the CIT(A) was not correct in observing that there was a non-compliance of section 249(4)(b) as held by ITAT, Indore in Shri Pushpendra Singh Chouhan Vs. ITO, ITA No. 122/Ind/2024, order dated 24.06.2024 as under: “7. We have

Sandeep Ramesh Keni, Maharashtra vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1080/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2013-14 Sandeep Ramesh Keni The Commissioner Of B-Wing, Room No. 24, Income Tax Panvel Plaza, Government Of India Behind S. K. Bajaj Vs. Ministry Of Finance, Showroom, Income Tax Department, Panvel, National Faceless Appeal Raigad-410206. Centre, Pan: Avapk7931R Delhi- 110011 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For : Assessee By : Shri Mayank Bagla, Adv. A/W Shri. Hiten Lala, Adv. : Smt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, D.R. Revenue By : 24 . 06 . 2024 Date Of Hearing : 25 . 07 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Bagla, Adv. a/w Shri. Hiten LalaFor Respondent: 24 . 06 . 2024

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 250Section 44

filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that as per the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of Income Tax Act, where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has to pay amount equal to the amount

Ramrao Tukaram Patil, Nashik vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 736/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.736/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

year under consideration as there was no taxable income. The assessee disputes the addition made by the AO and hence the provisions of section 249(4)(b) cannot be invoked. The assessee was not required to pay advance tax on the basis of assessed tax but was only required ... perused the material on record. Undisputedly, the CIT(A)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the appellant in limine invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) by holding that the appellant had failed to discharge the advance tax liability. However, there is no material on record to indicate that

Vikrant Rajendra Bidkar, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(5), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 708/PUN/2024[A.Y.2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.708/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

limine by holding that the appellant had failed to fulfil the necessary conditions for admission of appeal before CIT(A) as per section 249(4)(b). 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. When the matter was called on, there ... perused the material on record. Undisputedly, the CIT(A)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the appellant in limine invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) by holding that the appellant had failed to discharge the advance tax liability. However, there is no material on record to indicate that

Manisha Hemant More, Khadakpada Kalyan vs. ACIT-Central Circle-3 Thane, Thane

ITA 2061/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 249(4)(b)Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “D” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH

Manisha Hemant More, Khadakpada Kalyan vs. ACIT Central Circle 3 Thane, Thane

ITA 2057/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 249(4)(b)Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “D” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH

Srinivas Gadhe, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 650/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 650/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Srinivas Gadhe Vs. Income Tax Officer Warangal Ward 1 Pan:Aekpg3812L Warangal (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Smt. S Sandhya, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri G. V P Pavan Kumar,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Smt. S Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri G. V P Pavan Kumar,DR

Section 142Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

learned CIT (A). The learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on technical ground by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on Page 2 of 5 ITA No 650 of 2024 Srinivas Gadhe the ground that the assessee has failed ... that the learned CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee on totally technical ground by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee does not have taxable income for the A.Y 2017-18 and thus

Roshni Vishal Patel, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 4(4), Thane

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 2004/MUM/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Kirit MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “D” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH

Parwati Bricks Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradshri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 144Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69Section 69A

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 ... 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 I.T.A. No.351/Kol/2024 Parwati Bricks Pvt. Ltd. to the amount

Sidharth Satpal Saigal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer. 28(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1749/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, Sr. AR

Section 147Section 249(4)(b)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT

Spr Infrastructure India Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 128/HYD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2011-12 Spr Infrastructure India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Limited, Circle 3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaccd4913G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.Ar 09.07.2024 Date Of Hearing: Date Of Pronouncement: 10.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR

Section 144Section 148Section 250

order passed by the ld.CIT(A), which is to the following effect : “3. Decision : As per the provisions of the section 249(4)(b) of the Act, the appeal shall not be admitted, unless the appellant has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable ... authorities, the assessee was having losses and therefore, the assessee has not paid self-assessment tax. Further, as mandated by the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, the assessee has a reason for not depositing the self-assessment and hence, he made a request before the ld.CIT

Shri Manish Agarwal, Chennai vs. The DCIT, Ncc-4(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1083/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1082 & 1083/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. Shri Manish Agarwal, The Dcit, Suit No.314, Ram Lakhan Chambers, Ncc-4(1), General Muthiah Mudaly Street, Chennai. Sowcarpet, Chennai-600 079. [Pan: Afkpm 9253 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.KarunakaranFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 208Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 4Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Shri Manish Agarwal, Chennai vs. The DCIT, Ncc-4(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1082/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.KarunakaranFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 208Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 4Section 69A

Jhunjhunbalaji Motors Pvt.Ltd., Jhunjhunu vs. ACIT Circle-Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

ITA 344/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 151(2)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, 'A' JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Jhunjhunbalji Motors Pvt.Ltd., Jhunjhunu vs. ACIT, Circle-Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

ITA 343/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 151(2)

Mr. Ravindra Karadahalli Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 870/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Abhishek Murthy R., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

However, before the CIT(A), assessee had made detailed submissions. The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by invoking section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Assessee submitted that he is not liable for long-term capital gains since the property sold was agricultural land. Assessee ... condoned. 7. However, before the CIT(A), assessee had made detailed submissions. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by invoking section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Assessee submitted that it is not liable for as it is involved in promoting Khadi Udyog and is involved

Mr. Ravindra Karadahalli Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 635/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Abhishek Murthy R., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)