2025 (4) TMI 1957

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of '2' days in filing of this appeal. Since assessee was prevented by sufficient cause, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for condonation of delay, for which, the Ld.DR didn't raise any objection and hence, we condone the delay of '2' days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 3. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) not admitting the appeal of the assessee since the assessee didn't pay the tax. 4. The brief facts relating to this issue are that the assessee is a proprietor of M/s.Aathika Infrastructure engaged in the real estate business and had filed her return of income (RoI) for AY 2012-13 on 27.12.2012 ad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k. As mentioned above, the appellant was specifically asked to furnish the details of payment of self assessment tax on the returned income but has failed to furnish those particulars. It is evident from the Writ petition copy forwarded to this office that the appellant had paid only Rs. 24,00,000/- as against total demand of Rs. 1,23,74,624/- (excluding interest u/s.234A, 234B & 234C). From the above, it is clear that the appellant did not pay the tax due on the returned income. Even for a moment, the appellant's claim for reduction of income by revising closing stock to a lower figure of Rs. 9,12,82,850/- as against Rs. 11,59,57,906/- is accepted, the appellant would still be falling short of payment of tax due on accepted income. It ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder passed by the AO u/s.143(3) of the Act on 30.03.2015 had preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Coimbatore-2, which was not admitted, since the Ld.CIT(A) noted that the assessee failed to furnish the details of payment of tax on self-assessed income in Form-35. In this regard, the Ld.CIT(A) noted that the assessee had also filed a Writ- Petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court wherein the assessee had admitted of paying only Rs. 24 lakhs as against the total demand of Rs. 1,23,74,624/- [excluding interest u/s.234A, 234B & 234C]. Thus, according to the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee didn't pay the tax due on the returned income. Moreover, the Ld.CIT(A) noted that even the assessee didn't pay at least 25% of the disputed tax as ordered ....