TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eard together and are being disposed of by a consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. 2. First we shall take up six appeals comprising of ITA Nos 1239 to 1244/PN/2010 wherein facts and circumstances and the issue involved are identical. In all these appeals, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee as non-maintainable for violation of provisions of section 249(4) of the Act. As per the Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals), on the date of filing of the appeals, taxes due on the returned income were not paid and, therefore, the appeals are non-maintainable in terms of section 249(4) of the Act. 3. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee has furnished a chart to point out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) the tax due on the income returned was not paid. However , the claim of the assessee is that requisite taxes alongwith the tax demand raised consequent to the assessment , has been paid before the final hearing of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) and, therefore, it constitutes a sufficient compliance with the provisions of section 249(4) of the Act . In this context, co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bhumiraj Construct ions (supra) has observed that the objective behind sect ion 249(4) is to ensure payment of tax on income returned before the admission of an appeal. As per our co-ordinate Bench, if the appeal is filed without payment of tax on returned inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals) and, therefore, following the parity of reasoning in the case of Bhumiraj Construct ions (supra), the appeals of the assessee could not be dismissed as non-maintainable under sect ion 249(4) of the Act. As a result thereof , the impugned order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is set aside and the appeals of the assessee are allowed. 6. The learned Departmental representative had referred to the judgment of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of S. Alagarswamy (supra) in support of the impugned order. No doubt, the payment of tax due on the income returned by the assessee before filing of an appeal against the assessment order, is a condition precedent and as per the Hon ble High Court, such a non-compliance render ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder dated 12.3.2010 and treating the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2006-07 as non-maintainable. Herein also, the Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals) has held that as on the date of filing of the original appeal taxes were not paid on the total income returned and, therefore, the appeal was non-maintainable in terms of section 249(4) of the Act. Accordingly, the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) originally on 12.3.2010 has been amended and the appeal treated as non-maintainable, vide the impugned order dated 30.6.2010. 9. On this aspect, following the parity of reasoning laid down in the case of Shri Milind Karmalkar Havel (supra), the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
