← 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)

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

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

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 901/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

Rajendra Prasad, Palamau, Satbarwa vs. ITO, Daltonganj

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2018-19 Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Vs. Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ramghat, Ramghat, Palamau, Palamau, Satbarwa-822126 822126 Pan/Gir No. . (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017- 18/10212042 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Rajat Essee. Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, ld CIT DR
Section 207Section 208Section 210Section 249(4)(b)

merits, and the amount of advance tax payable by the assessee, for the purpose of presenting the appeal, as per provisions of section 249(4)(b), should be taken as NIL.” 4. In reply, ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order

Muppalla Padmavathi, Guntur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Guntur

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

ITA 396/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 396/Viz/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Muppalla Padmavathi V. Income Tax Officer - Ward – 2(1) D.No. 8-188 Topu Kornepadu Guntur Medical College Road Vatticherukuru Mandal Guntur – 522004 Andhra Pradesh Guntur - 522017 [Pan:Foipm1273L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 147Section 148

hearing. 8. Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that assessee had no income during the relevant period and as such the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act cannot be called into aid. In support of the above contention, Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision ... issue in favour of the assessee. While holding so the Coordinate Bench held as under:- “6. We have considered the submissions made. Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, read as under: - “S.249(4) No appeal under this Chapter shall be admitted unless at the time of filing

Kadavath Peedikayil Ashraf, Kannur vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-3, Kannur

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 513/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Neethu S, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 208Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 271ASection 271BSection 44A

grossly erred in law in holding that the appeal is infructuous for non-payment of advance tax without appreciating that the provisions of section 249 (4) (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which require payment of advance tax as a precondition for admission of an appeal, are applicable only ... order" and not against a "penalty order". The impugned order being an appeal against penalty levied under sections 271B. the condition stipulated under section 249(4) (b) is inapplicable and the rejection of the appeal on this ground is bad in law and liable to be set aside. C. That

Zaffer Ullah Shah S/O Sh Abdul Gani Shah Khokhar Complex Distt Police Line Street Doda 182201, Distt Doda vs. Income Tax Office Ward 2(4) Udhampur 103-Ward 10 Dhar Road Udhampur, Udhampur

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

ITA 87/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 87/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

addition made may be deleted. 5. That the CIT(A) was not at all justified in invoking the provisions of section 249(4) for the first time and accordingly thereby rejecting the appeal without giving any reasonable opportunity of being heard. The worthy CIT(A) should have allowed an opportunity ... being heard in view of the provisions of section 249(4). The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is purely based on conjectures, surmises and suppositions and the same is liable to be cancelled. 6. That the CIT(A) did not appreciate that the addition

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Rajbagh Srinagar

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 166/ASR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

coupled with the fact that the assessee has not filed any return for the years under appeal, thereby violating the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961 and has not made any application requesting for exemption from pre deposit as per proviso to section 249(4 ... first appellate authority without admitting the appeals for hearing on merits on the ground that the appeals are hit by the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961, because in the instant case no returns are filed by the assessee and no advance taxes as payable

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Rajbagh

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 161/ASR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

coupled with the fact that the assessee has not filed any return for the years under appeal, thereby violating the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961 and has not made any application requesting for exemption from pre deposit as per proviso to section 249(4 ... first appellate authority without admitting the appeals for hearing on merits on the ground that the appeals are hit by the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961, because in the instant case no returns are filed by the assessee and no advance taxes as payable

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Rajbagh Srinagar

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 158/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

coupled with the fact that the assessee has not filed any return for the years under appeal, thereby violating the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961 and has not made any application requesting for exemption from pre deposit as per proviso to section 249(4 ... first appellate authority without admitting the appeals for hearing on merits on the ground that the appeals are hit by the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961, because in the instant case no returns are filed by the assessee and no advance taxes as payable

Charanjit Singh, Jalandhar vs. ITO- W-4(2), Jalandhar

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

ITA 681/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv
Section 147Section 148Section 208Section 210Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

assessee has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) by refusing to admit the said appeal for violation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, without allowing any opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. 3. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee ... assessee has offered comments as not applicable) thereby refusing to admit the appeal for decision on merits for violation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. 5. Before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a deed writer

Bikram Masih, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 569/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

same for non-payment of advance tax in this case, where no return is filed resulting in violation of the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. We find from the record that no notice of hearing has been issued from the office of the ld. first appellate ... been paid by the assessee and no return has also been submitted by the assessee and there is a violation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. However, in our opinion, the ld. first appellate authority should have allowed an opportunity of hearing to the assessee

Kalkere Puttaraju Vajramunie, Royal Hermitage, Kalkere B.O, Kalkere vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Bangalore, Bangalore, Karnataka

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

ITA 902/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

appeal are interconnected and pertain dismissal of appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) by invoking the provision of section 249(4) of the Act and passing the ex-parte order. 25. The relevant facts are that the assessee for the year under consideration has not filed a return of income ... that no self-assessment tax paid by the assessee for the year under consideration. Hence, the learned CIT(A) invoking the provisions of section 249(4) of the Act dismissed the appeal of the assessee as non-maintainable. 30. Being aggrieved by the order

Kalkere Puttaraju Vajramunie, Royal Hermitage, Kalkere B.O, Kalkere vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Bangalore, Bangalore, Karnataka

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

ITA 901/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

appeal are interconnected and pertain dismissal of appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) by invoking the provision of section 249(4) of the Act and passing the ex-parte order. 25. The relevant facts are that the assessee for the year under consideration has not filed a return of income ... that no self-assessment tax paid by the assessee for the year under consideration. Hence, the learned CIT(A) invoking the provisions of section 249(4) of the Act dismissed the appeal of the assessee as non-maintainable. 30. Being aggrieved by the order

Hemlata Harakchand Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 835/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

appeal, CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes on the ground of non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 249(4) of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) observed as per the assessment order the Assessing Officer had computed the total income ... before CIT(Appeals). Pursuant to this, a deficiency letter was issued to the assessee, requiring the assessee to comply with the requirements of Section 249(4)(b) by either furnishing proof of advance tax payment or making an application for exemption under the proviso to the said section. The assessee

The Shuklatirth Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Bharuch vs. The ITO (Exemption) Ward, Vadodara

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

ITA 807/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 254Section 271Section 69

appellate proceedings, which is against the principles of natural justice. Further, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal by invoking section 249(4)(b) of the Act for non-payment of advance tax. We find that that the assessee did not file a return of income

The Shuklatirth Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Bharuch vs. The ITO (Exemption) Ward, Vadodara

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

ITA 806/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 254Section 271Section 69

appellate proceedings, which is against the principles of natural justice. Further, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal by invoking section 249(4)(b) of the Act for non-payment of advance tax. We find that that the assessee did not file a return of income

Dharmendra Kumar, Bhanwargarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Baran

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

ITA 1322/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil Agarwal, CA, (Thru: V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 249(4)

does not have anything to say in this matter. Hence, the ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal as per provisions of Section 249(4) of the Act and dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing at para 2.2 to 3 as under:- 2.2. The appellant ... safely inferred that the appellant does not have anything to say in this matter 2.3. In this regard, provisions of Section 249(4) of the Act, is reproduced here under "[(4) No appeal under this chapter shall be admitted unless at the time of filing of the appeal- 4 DHARMENDRA

Kamlesh Kumar, Patna vs. ITO Ward- 6 (4), Patna

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

ITA 147/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraι.Τ.Α. No.: 147/Pat/2025

Section 144Section 250

verifying the factual matrix of the Appellant's case. The learned CIT(A) has taken the wrong shelter of the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of The Income Tax Act 1961, which states that where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee ... present appeal is not liable to be admitted. The appeal is infructuous and is therefore dismissed. The main ingredient of the section 249(4) (b) is to pay an amount equal to advance tax payable by the assessee, however, in the present case, the assessee has Page

Sdc Construction, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD 1(3), Jiapur

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

ITA 347/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Mathur, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR a
Section 144BSection 147Section 249(4)(a)Section 68

/NFAC, has erred in not admitting the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has complied with the provisions of section 249(4)(a) and 249(4)(b). However, the fact of filing of return of income and payment of tax was placed on record. The action ... been filed by the appellant for the assessment year. No whether an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per section 249(4)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been paid 4. As per provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, where no return

Suresh Patel, Dewas vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 131/IND/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

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

Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 253(5)Section 271(1)(c)

wrongly treated assessee’s first-appeal as deficient on the footing of non-payment of advance tax in terms of section 249(4)(b) and wrongly dismissed as ‘non- admitted’ whereas the factual position of assessee’s case is such that no advance tax or self-assessment tax was payable ... 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