9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing exempt him from the operation of the aforesaid statutory provision. The statutory requirement contemplated in Clause (b) of sub-section (4) of Section 249 of the Act would stand triggered only where any obligation was cast upon the assessee to pay advance tax . As stated by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, in absence of any taxable income for the year under consideration [as was stated by him in the SOF filed before the CIT(Appeals)] no obligation was cast upon him to compute and pay any advance tax u/ss. 208 209 of the Act. Considering the fact that as no obligation was cast upon the assessee to compute/deposit any amount towards advance tax for the subject year, we are unable to concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) who had dismissed the appeal as not maintainable for the reason of non-compliance of the mandatory condition contemplated in Clause (b) of sub-section (4) of Section 249 As in the present case, the assessee had not only before ITAT but had also in the Statement of facts stated before the CIT(Appeals) that he had no taxable income, therefore, in absence of any obligation cast upon the assessee to compute/pay a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e his return of income. As the assessee failed to file his return of income in compliance to notice issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 10.03.2018, therefore, the A.O was constrained to proceed with and frame the assessment vide an ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the Act. 3. On being queried about the cash deposits made during the demonetization period, it was the claim of the assessee before the A.O that the same were sourced out of his agriculture income from 33 acres of agricultural land that remained under his self-cultivation. Also, it was stated by the assessee that he had sold certain stretch of land at Village: Manpur on 08.03.2017 and the sale consideration as stated in the registered sale deed was earlier received by him on 06.06.2016. As regards the cash deposit of Rs.10 lacs made in his bank account on 10.11.2016, it was stated by the assessee that the same was sourced out of the cash withdrawals made from his aforesaid bank account. The A.O after seeking directions u/s 144A of the Act from the JCIT, Range-2, Bhilai issued Show case notice (SCN) dated 19.11.2019 to the assessee and called upon him to explain as to why the cash deposits of Rs.10 lacs made in his bank account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his contentions. 8. Shri Tanmay Jain, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short 'AR') for the assessee at the threshold submitted that the CIT(Appeals) had dismissed the appeal on the basis of perverse observations. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee was an agriculturist having no other source of income except for certain interest income which was substantially lower than the basic exemption limit for the subject year, therefore, no obligation was cast upon him to file his return of income for the year under consideration, i.e. A.Y. 2017-18. Carrying his contention further, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that in absence of any taxable income no obligation was cast upon the assessee u/ss. 208 r.w.s. 209 of the Act to compute and pay any amount of advance tax for the subject year. The Ld. AR in order to fortify his aforesaid contention had taken me through a computation of probable advance tax liability , Page 73 of APB, which revealed that the income of the assessee during the subject year was substantially lower than the basic exemption limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the Commissioner (Appeals) may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause. The CIT(Appeals) observed that as the assessee who had not filed his return of income had neither paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him; nor filed any application seeking exemption from operation of the aforesaid statutory provision for any good and sufficient reason, therefore, he had failed to comply with the statutory requirements contemplated u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the said count itself. 11. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compass, i.e. sustainability of the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that the appeal of the assessee who had not filed his return of income for the subject year was not maintainable for the reason that he had failed to satisfy the conditions contemplated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
