TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (11) TMI 344
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his common order of the sake of convenience. 2. Since facts in all these appeals are identical, we narrate the facts as in ITA No. 240/Hyd/2014 in the case of Nallamala Agro Farms Pvt. Ltd. Assessment u/s. 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 was completed on 02.12.2010 assessing income at Rs. 20,46,77,320 as per normal provisions of the Act. Tax liability was worked out at Rs. 6,53,95,668. As the tax liability under normal computation was greater than tax liability under MAT, income-tax demand was raised as per normal computation. The income arose on account of sale of land and the assessee had offered income under capital gains in its return but in the assessment made, the Assessing Officer computed the income under the head "Income from busin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us with the following grounds of appeal: (1) The order of the CIT(A) in rejecting the appeal filed by the appellant is not maintainable u/s 294(4) of the IT Act, 1961 is totally unsustainable both on facts and in law. (2) The Learned CIT(A) failed to note that the appellant's income under normal provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 other than book profit was "NIL" and the appellant having been assessed under the normal provisions Act the question of paying any admitted tax does not arise as the income returned was "NIL" and, therefore, the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the appeal as not maintainable. (3) The Learned CIT(A) was not right in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9(4) of the Act. Against this the assessee came in appeal before this Tribunal. The Tribunal held at paras 19-20 as follows: "19. We have duly considered the rival contentions. From the perusal of record and on consideration of respective arguments, following points have emerged out for our adjudication: (1) Whether the Tribunal has powers under Section 254(1) to give a finding that, an appeal filed in violation of Section 249(4) would be termed as defective one and the moment the defect is cured by making payment of agreed tax, the appeal can be decided on merit subject to limitation provided in Section 249(2) and its condonation thereof as per Section 249(3). (2) Whether non-availability of funds for making payment of agreed taxes with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere a return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has paid the tax due on the income returned by him; or (b) where no return 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 filling under Clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the CIT(A) may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause." Section 254(1).: "The Tribunal may, after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit." 9. In the above case the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A).....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appeals before him on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of bearing to the assessee and decide the same afresh in accordance with law." 11. The chart extracted below shows the date of payment of admitted tax and interest by the assessee. 12. In these circumstances, we find the only requirement of section 249(4) is payment of tax due on returned income and there is no time limit prescribed for payment of such taxes. Therefore, if an appeal is filed after making of payment, it cannot be said that the requirement of section 249(4) has not been complied with. The CIT(A) can use his discretionary power and admit the appeal if he is satisfied about the liquidity crunch or any other reasonable cause for non payment of taxes. Section 2....