← 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)

Sushma Singhal, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed, but only for statistical purposes

ITA 86/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 69

erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal by applying the 2 Smt. Sushma Singhal ITA no.86/Nag./2024 provisions of section 249(4)(b)? however, the said section is not applicable in the present case as the assessee is exempted for filing the income tax return and making ... advance tax payable by the assessee. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) was of the view that as per the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, the assessee is mandatorily required to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

Meharunnisa, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2097/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. G. Sathyanarayana, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 44ASection 69A

above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) noted that assessee has not complied to the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Even assessee has not paid tax as per demand under section 156 of the Act and dismissed appeal

Mahanth Kumar Singh, Muzaffarpur vs. ITO, Muzaffarpur

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

ITA 232/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 250Section 69A

page no.53 to 55 of the paper book. In the above judgement the Honorable ITAT has categorically held that "Statutory requirement contemplated in Section 249(4)(b) would stand triggered only when any obligation is cast upon assessee to pay "ADVANCE-TAX". Where assessee had no taxable income, no obligation ... taxable income, Commissioner (Appeal) could not have held that he has failed to comply with statutory condition contemplated in Section 249(4)(b) of the Act". All the above facts couldn't be examined either at the stage of scrutiny by A.O. or proceeding before CIT-Appeal. Therefore

Shaju Raman Arangath, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3(2), Kalyan

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

ITA 6755/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI. OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri. P. D. Chougule SR. DR
Section 1Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 195Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 6

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant inlimine alleging the violation of the provision of section 249(4)(b) on the part of the Appellant whereas the said provisions were not applicable to the Appellant for the relevant Assessment Year ... vide order dated 06.11.2024, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has violated the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, where the assessee has failed to make payment of the amount equal to the advance tax which

Pravin Sakharam Gulambe, Raigad vs. ITO Ward 5, Panvel

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

ITA 2673/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2673/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Pravin Sakharam Gulambe, V The Income Tax Sjhubham Raje Enterprises, S Officer, House No.70A, At Bhagad, Ward-5, Panvel. Post Vile, Tal Mangaon, Dist Raigad, Maharashtra – 402308. Pan: Aslpg2336A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Chandan Katariya -Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/02/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Manish Borad, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under

Section 144Section 147Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground under Section 249(4)(b) and ignored on law and facts as the tax is deducted at source and deposited to the credit of central government against ... filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal in limine solely on the ITA No.2673/PUN/2024 [A] provision of section 249(4)(b) of the Act by not admitting appeal alleging that the appellant has not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance

Neeraj Tripathi, Agra vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(1) Agra, Agra

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR

Shivratan Motilalji Rathi HUF, India vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jalna, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2601/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2600 & 2601/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shri Vishal A. Makawane
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69

return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax liability invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act”. 4. Now the assessee has approached the Tribunal against the impugned orders passed by the ld.CIT(A). 5. After hearing

Shivratan Motilalji Rathi HUF, India vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jalna, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2600/PUN/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2600 & 2601/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shri Vishal A. Makawane
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69

return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax liability invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act”. 4. Now the assessee has approached the Tribunal against the impugned orders passed by the ld.CIT(A). 5. After hearing

Pravin Sakharam Gulambe, Raigad vs. ITO Ward 5, Panvel

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

ITA 2674/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2674/Pun/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shri Pravin Sakharam Vs Ito, Ward-5, Gulambe, Panvel Shubham Raje Enterprises House No. 70 A, At Bhagad, Post Vile Tal Mangaon, Dist Raigad 402308, Maharashtra Pan-Aslpg2336A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Chandan KatariyaFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl
Section 144Section 147Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 250(6)

raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground under Section 249(4)(b) and ignored on law and facts as the tax Is deducted at source and deposited to the credit of central government against

Abdul Majid Ward No 6 Mohalla Radio Statsion Haveli Poonch, Poonch vs. Romesh Kumar Sharma Income Tax Officer Jammu, Jammu

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

ITA 374/ASR/2023[ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Feb 2025

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahayi.T.A. No.374/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

assessee has not paid any advance tax for the year and has not filed any application alongwith the appeal as per proviso to section 249(4)(b) requesting the ld. First appellate authority to exempt him from the operation of the provisions of clause (b) of section 249(4 ... argued that the appeal is not maintainable for nonpayment of advance tax as per the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961. 9. It is seen that the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has refused to admit this appeal for hearing on merits u/s 249(4)(b

Arvind Pratap Singh, Fatehgarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Farrukhabad

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

ITA 400/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Arvind Pratap Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 1/65, Bazariya Aliganj, Ward-4(2)(1), Fatehgarh, Up Farrukhabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bnlps7513K Assessee By : Shri C. S. Yadav, Adv Revenue By: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/02/2025

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 249(4)(b)

this appeal is as to whether the ld NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of violation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials ... appeal before the Learned NFAC. The Learned NFAC observed that assessee had not paid the advance tax and thereby violated the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the Learned NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee as un- admitted. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before

Vinay Kumar Jha, Madhubani vs. PCIT-2, Patna

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

ITA 306/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Patna06 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

column no. 8 of Form 35 the assessee has mentioned that an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per section 249(4)(b) of the Act has not been paid. The Ld. CIT(A) examined the provision of section 249(4)(b) of the Act and issued ... 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

Shree Gajanan Gas Agency, Beed vs. Income Tax Officer, Beed

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

ITA 2012/PUN/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Pushpadant Vinod SahujiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

furnished the details. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of not complying to the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act which provides for payment of advance tax on the total income if no return of income has been filed. 4

Manoj Singh Gurjar, Gwalior vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward2(2) Gwalior, Gwalior

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

ITA 322/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)

whether the ld NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as not maintainable by applying the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. - 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available ... assessee at Rs 4,04,26,106/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld NFAC. The ld NFAC applied the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act by stating that assessee had not paid the advance tax liability and accordingly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. Aggrieved

Kashtakar Cold Storage Private Limited, Farrukhabad vs. Income Tax Officer 4(2)(1), Farrukhabad

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

ITA 162/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Agra05 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Manoj Singh Gurjar, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 214, Gokul Vihar, Near Ward-2(2), Aastha Nagar Gate Behind In Front Gwalior Of Deen Dayal Nagar Gate, Bahadurpur, Bo Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bdfpg6465G Assessee By : Shri S. C. Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/02/2025

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)

whether the ld NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as not maintainable by applying the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Manoj Singh Gurjar 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused ... assessee at Rs 4,04,26,106/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld NFAC. The ld NFAC applied the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act by stating that assessee had not paid the advance tax liability and accordingly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. Aggrieved

Jasbir Kumar, Legal Heir of Sh. Kishna (Deceased), Yamuna Nagar, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 196/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga & Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset submitted that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal with the help of Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act. He pointed out that assessee did not file the return of income. The AO has reopened the assessment and issued ... parte order. The ld. CIT(A) ought to have given a chance to the assessee for claiming exemption from invoking of Section 249(4)(b) or CIT(A) ought to have suo-moto exempted the assessee from implication of this Section and should have decided the appeal atleast on merit

Jasbir Kumar, Legal Heir of Sh. Kishna (Deceased), Yamuna Nagar, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 195/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga & Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset submitted that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal with the help of Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act. He pointed out that assessee did not file the return of income. The AO has reopened the assessment and issued ... parte order. The ld. CIT(A) ought to have given a chance to the assessee for claiming exemption from invoking of Section 249(4)(b) or CIT(A) ought to have suo-moto exempted the assessee from implication of this Section and should have decided the appeal atleast on merit

Erode District Tractor Owners Association, Erode vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Erode

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

ITA 2516/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2513, 2514, 2515, 2516, 2517, 2518 & 2519/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri Abdul Munaf Irfanudeen, The Deputy Commissioner No.42, Maraikayar Street-Ii Floor, Vs. Of Income Tax, Near Annai Ayesha Mahal, Central Circle – 1(4), Chennai – 600 001. Chennai. Pan: Aawpi 0038G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri Shrenik Chordia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 139Section 208Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

assessee has primarily raised two grounds namely ground Nos.2 & 3. Ground No.2 relates to whether the CIT(A) has erred in invoking section 249(4)(b) of the Act and dismissing the appeals in limine by holding that advance tax liability is to be based on the assessed income instead ... adjudicated by the CIT(A)]. 4. Firstly, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee by invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) in the assessment year 2015-16 dismissing the appeals in limine read as follows

Shiv Nandan Prasad Suman, Madhubani vs. ITO, Ward - 6(1), Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 374/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.374/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shiv Nandan Prasad Suman….....…..…………………....Appellant Laukaha, Madhubani, Bihar-847421. [Pan: Aitps3598Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(1), Patna…....….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Mayank Manvendra, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 30, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessment Order Was Framed In The Case Of The Assessee U/S 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act As The Assessee Failed To File Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2013-14 Within The Prescribed Limit. The Assessing Officer Determined Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.20,24,948/- By Making Certain Additions In Respect Of Unexplained Investment Of Rs.1445000/- U/S 69 Of The Act, Salary Income Of Rs.576492/- & Interest Income Of Rs.3456/-.

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

preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing that as per section 249(4)(b) of the Act where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee was liable to pay an amount equal ... stated that the assessee did not file application as per the proviso to section 249(4) seeking exemption from operation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on technical ground without going into merits

Sameer Manohar Fulari, Mapusa vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 201/PAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 201/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2018-19 ) Sameer Manohar Fulari, Vs National Faceless Near Bank Of India,Keni Assessment . Waddo,Mapusa Bardez, Centre,Nfac,Delhi. Noth Goa-403507 . Goa. Pan .No. Aaopf3440P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144Section 249(4)(b)

facts, findings of the AO and Form no 35 and find that the assessee has not paid the taxes and the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act 3 ITA. No.201/PAN/2023 Sameer Manohar Fulari... are attracted and has issued letter and since there was no compliance ... interested and find that as per Form no 35, the assessee has not paid the taxes/advance tax and the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act are attracted and the CIT(A) has issued letter dated 19.09.2023 referred at Page 3 Para4.4 of the order and there