← All Phrases

“Section 249(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 249Section 249(4)422 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 249(4) is Pr. CIT v. Golden Peace Hotels and Resorts (P) Ltd. (124 Taxmann.com 249), cited in 105 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 249(4)

Pr. CIT v. Golden Peace Hotels and Resorts (P) Ltd.
124 Taxmann.com 249 · 2021 · Supreme Court
105
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is not sustainable if the notice issued under Section 274 fails to specifically mention whether the charge relates to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessing Officer must specify the exact charge for the penalty to be valid.

Trust (249 ITR 533) (Bom.) 3. CIT vs. Red Rose School (163 Taxman 19 (All.) 4. DIT(E) v. Alarippu (
172 ITR 698 · 1988 · High Court
61
citing judgments

Income received by a trust from sources like extra fees can be taxed at the maximum marginal rate, while other income remains eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT
242 ITR 381 · 2000 · Supreme Court
32
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated unless the assessment proceedings based on a previously filed return have been terminated. Notice for reassessment cannot be issued while original assessment proceedings are pending.

ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC)
74 ITR 836 · 1969 · Reported
24
citing judgments

Evidence collected during an illegal search can still be used against the assessee. An assessment made based on such evidence is valid.

CIT v. Ashoka Engineering Co.
194 ITR 645 · 1992 · Supreme Court
15
citing judgments

The right of appeal is conferred by statute and should be interpreted liberally and practically. Whether a right to appeal is available should be guided by the form, not the substance, of the order.

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).

Komalakshi v. Dy. CIT
292 ITR 99 · 2007 · High Court
14
citing judgments

Admission of an appeal before the CIT(A) is subject to the mandatory condition of payment of tax due on the income returned by the assessee.

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)

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

Form No. 35 relating to the advanced tax payment as ‘Not Applicable’ and the Ld. CIT(A) has reproduced the provisions of section 249 (4), 234B (1) and 208 and has mentioned para 3.5 that though the appellant has not offered ‘YES’ comment at Serial No. 9 in form ... portal as per the instruction of the EBIX CASH. The one and only allegation of the NFAC (CIT-A) regarding noncompliance of Section 249(4) in this case is not correct due to following reason:- 1. The assessee had a total income for the year 2016-17 corresponding to A.Y.2017-18

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

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

Russell Adrian Rodrigues, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 23(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No98/Mum/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Russel Adrian Rodrigues, Vs. Ito, Ward-23(3)(1), 101, Diiago, “B” Sherly Ranjan Mumbai Road, Bandra West, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Adwpr 7259 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Subhash Chhajed, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm : The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Impugned Order Dated 28/12/2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act (“The Act”) By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Learned Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: – 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing The Assessee'S Appeal On Account Of Non-Compliance Of Section 249(4)(A) & 249(4)(B) Of The It Act., 1961 Completely Disregarding The Fact That Assessee Has Filed The Return & Paid The Due Tax Thereon As Mentioned In The Column 8.1 Of The Appeal Form No. 35. The Appellant Therefore Prays To Remand Back The Matter To Hon. Cit(A) For A Fresh Adjudication On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the Assessee's Appeal on account of non-compliance of section 249(4)(a) and 249(4)(b) of the IT Act., 1961 completely disregarding the fact that Assessee has filed the Return and paid the due tax thereon ... solitary grievance of the assessee is against the dismissal of its appeal by the learned CIT(A) by invoking the provisions of section 249(4) of the Act. 4. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. The brief facts of the case

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 ... outset, and on perusal of records, we notice that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine in light of provision of section 249(4) of the Act and in not admitting the appeal of the assessee on the grounds that the assessee has not paid an amount equal

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

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 ... determined the taxable income at Rs.58,29,000/-. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further pointed out that Section 249(4) contemplates that an appeal of the assessee would not be entertained by the CIT(A) unless assessee had paid the tax on the agreed income. In other words

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 ... determined the taxable income at Rs.58,29,000/-. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further pointed out that Section 249(4) contemplates that an appeal of the assessee would not be entertained by the CIT(A) unless assessee had paid the tax on the agreed income. In other words

Raj Kishore Upadhyay, Gopalganj vs. ITO, Siwan

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

ITA 459/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 249(4)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

could not succeed on account of a delay of 258 days, which was not condoned; and also due to the provision of Section 249(4) of the Act. 2.2 Further, aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds: I.T.A. No. 459/Pat/2024 Raj Kishore Upadhyay “1. For that

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 ... amount of advance tax. He also 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

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