← All Phrases

“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
14
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
13
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)

Shri Ambai Gramin Bigarsheti Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit Radhanagari, Radhanagari Kolhapur vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Kolhapur

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

ITA 401/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69ASection 80P

assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A). However, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes observing that in view of section 249(4)(b) of the Act the assessee has not deposited the Advance Tax payable by it and therefore appeal cannot be admitted for adjudication. 7. I find that

Shri Madho Tiwari, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward - 23(4), Hooghly Now I.T.O., Ward - 23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 2065/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Madho Tiwari, 432, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 23(1), Srikrishna Nagar, Pravash Hoogly. Nagar, Rishra, Hooghly, W.B Pan/Gir No.Admpt 4685 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sounitra Choudhury, Adv Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sounitra Choudhury, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

appeal, the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to comply with the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) as he had not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax that was payable by him. Hence, the assessee has filed

Millennium Contrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 424/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 68Section 69C

requested that the same may be upheld. 5. Before adjudicating the appeal, it is important to refer to the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, which is relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the appeal and which is as under: “249(4)(b): where

Ap Goyal Charitable Trust, East Delhi, Delhi India vs. ITO, Civic Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2038/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2Section 249(4)

amount not chargeable to tax and, therefore, the assessee is liable to pay advance tax and appeal was not admitted in terms of Section 249(4) (b) of the Act. The assessee before us in ground appeal No.17 challenged the action of ld. CIT(A) in not admitting the appeal ... sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause.” 8. Admittedly, as per section 249(4)(b) of the Act, in a case where no return of income has been filed by the assessee, then the appeal shall be maintainable before

Nadur Siddaganagaiah Chandrakanth, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 558/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri R. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL

Anup Majee, Purulia vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Kolkata

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 649/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 153ASection 153DSection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

appellate authority to entertain an appeal or to extend time for paying self-assessment tax, except in respect of cases falling under section 249(4)(b) in terms of proviso under said section. As stated earlier and admitted by the appellant, this is a case failing under Section 249(4

Anup Majee, Purulia vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Kolkata

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 648/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 153ASection 153DSection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

appellate authority to entertain an appeal or to extend time for paying self-assessment tax, except in respect of cases falling under section 249(4)(b) in terms of proviso under said section. As stated earlier and admitted by the appellant, this is a case failing under Section 249(4

Anup Majee, Bhamuria vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), West Bengal

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 647/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 153ASection 153DSection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

appellate authority to entertain an appeal or to extend time for paying self-assessment tax, except in respect of cases falling under section 249(4)(b) in terms of proviso under said section. As stated earlier and admitted by the appellant, this is a case failing under Section 249(4

Laxmanji Khodaji Solanki (Thakor), Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 1626/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 148Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 271F

dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable noting that the assessee had not paid any advance tax and by referring to the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, as per which, where no return is filed by the assessee, the assessee has to pay an amount equal ... 1626/Ahd/2024 [Laxmanji Khodaji Solanki (Thakor) vs. ITO] A.Y. 2017-18 -9- maintainable for not having paid advance taxes on its income, as per section 249(4)(b) of the Act. 13. In the light of the same, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and noting

S G Joshi (HUF), Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1059/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishras. G. Joshi (Huf) Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-4/33, Safdarjung Enclave, Circle 29(1) New Delhi-110029 New Delhi Pan: Aaihs9281F

Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in invoking the provision of Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) and erred in dismissing the Appeal of the Assessee ignoring the fact that ... Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), challenging the assessment order dated 13/05/2023, which has been dismissed by invoking provision of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. 5. The provision of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act is applicable only when no return has been filed

Sarojamma, Ramanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ramanagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 43/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Gokul, Advocate
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 253(5)Section 69A

assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who however, dismissed the appeal on 24.10.2024 by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Against the said order, the present appeal is filed before the Tribunal. The appeal ought to have been filed ... assessee in the grounds of appeal are that the learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 10 Lakh on account of cash deposit and Rs. 75,212 on account

Baba Construction Private Limited, New Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1872/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Kumar Indori, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 249(4)(b)

grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by invoking provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. [4. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the only issue is with regard ... dismissing the appeal of assessee by Ld. CIT (A) by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, more particularly when the returned income has been filed by the assessee wherein due tax has duly been paid. The ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order without appreciating

Varun Trade Link Private Limited, Kolkata vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 401/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

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

heard and the record and the submissions made were examined. Before adjudicating the appeal, it is important to refer to the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, which is relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the appeal and which is as under: “249(4

Rajinder Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer, Mansa

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

ITA 310/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Sh. K. R. Jain, Adv
Section 147Section 148Section 208Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69A

dismissing the appeal by refusing to admit the same on the grounds of non-payment of advance tax being hit by provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, when on the facts of the instant case, no advance tax is payable by the assesssee u/s 208 r.w.s

Akhilesh Kumar Patel, Shahdol vs. Income Tax Officer Dhar, Dhar

ITA 627/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 147

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Vengala Rao Madala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.193/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Vengala Rao Madala, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-11(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aqnpm6758J (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Vengala Rao Madala (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 04.10.2023 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of 403 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)

During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) found that the assessee had not ITA No.193/Hyd/2025 6 satisfied the requirement of section 249(4)(b) of the Act prior to filing the appeal. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) issued communications affording opportunity to the assessee; however, the assessee ... respond. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that the assessee had not satisfied the requirement of section 249(4)(b) of the Act prior to filing the appeal. 7. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

Visisth Chay Vyapar Ltd, Meerut vs. ITO Ward-26(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 905/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

return of income and paid the self-assessment tax of Rs.10,05,536/-. Therefore, the case of the assessee will not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act and he prayed that the case of the assessee may be remitted back to the Id. CIT (A) to admit ... filed its return of income and also paid the due self- assessment tax. Therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the Id. CIT (A) to admit the appeal of the assessee and adjudicate the same on merits

Visisth Chay Vyapar, Meerut vs. ITO Ward-26(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 904/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

return of income and paid the self-assessment tax of Rs.10,05,536/-. Therefore, the case of the assessee will not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act and he prayed that the case of the assessee may be remitted back to the Id. CIT (A) to admit ... filed its return of income and also paid the due self- assessment tax. Therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the Id. CIT (A) to admit the appeal of the assessee and adjudicate the same on merits

Visisth Chay Vyapar Limited, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-26(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 903/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

return of income and paid the self-assessment tax of Rs.10,05,536/-. Therefore, the case of the assessee will not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act and he prayed that the case of the assessee may be remitted back to the ld. CIT (A) to admit ... filed its return of income and also paid the due self- assessment tax. Therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the ld. CIT (A) to admit the appeal of the assessee and adjudicate the same on merits

Visisth Chay Vyapar Limited, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-26(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 902/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

return of income and paid the self-assessment tax of Rs.10,05,536/-. Therefore, the case of the assessee will not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act and he prayed that the case of the assessee may be remitted back to the Id. CIT (A) to admit ... filed its return of income and also paid the due self- assessment tax. Therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall under section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the Id. CIT (A) to admit the appeal of the assessee and adjudicate the same on merits