INDRAJIT MAHANTY, J. - (1.)Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
(2.)The petitioner herein, namely, Md. Masud Ahmed, has sought to challenge the order dtd. 18/5/2022 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner before the authority, on the ground of non deposit of the 50% of the statutory tax and penalty assessed. Learned counsel for the petitioner asserted that the amount of 50% of tax and penalty worked out to the amount of Rs.3,33,425.00 and the financial condition of the petitioner did not permit him to make such pre deposit. As a consequence of which the appeal filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to file an affidavit indicating the immovable asset the petitioner has in his name and pursuant to such directions, an affidavit came to be filed by the petitioner. The said affidavit dtd. 28/8/2022 indicates in Schedule - A,B,C and D, the four properties in which the petitioner claims to have common interest with the other successors of his late father. But the learned counsel submits that the petitioner does not have any liquid assests other than the immovable assests to the extent of his interest along with the other successors in the aforesaid four properties.
;