CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd.

149 ITR 703High Court1984#2072 most cited

What is CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. authority for?

Interest under Section 215 of the Income Tax Act is not leviable if tax was deductible at source but was not deducted by the payer. The liability for advance tax on interest income and the corresponding interest liability for non-payment arises only when the payer has failed to deduct tax at source.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. · Section 215 · interest under section 215 · tax deductible at source · advance tax · interest income · payer not deducting tax · levy of interest not justified

Sections most often in play

Section 234BSection 234CSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 194LDSection 195

Issues it is cited on

advance taxsection 234bsection 234indiainterest

Judgments citing CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd.

M/S Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 6385/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

M/S Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 6384/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 1114/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3714/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3713/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3696/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3695/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3677/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

Sumitomo Corporation, Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3676/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 3675/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234B

…any and its entire income chargeable to tax in India was subject to TDS under Section 195 of the Act. Therefore, no interest under section 234B of the Act could be charged even if the payer had not deducted tax at source. • In CIT vs. Madras Fertilizers Ltd. (149 ITR 703, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the liability to pay advance tax did not arise where the income was subject to deduction of tax at source. • The Hon’ble Uttarnchal High Court in cases of CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT vs. Reading and Bates Exploration Co. (2005) (278 ITR 47) has held that where the employer-com…

Raskspace Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3507/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…ector of IT (International Taxation) v. Morgan Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. 7. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 703 (Mad), where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under s. 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High Cou…

Rackspace, Us Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1075/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…ector of IT (International Taxation) v. Morgan Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. 7. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 703 (Mad), where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under s. 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High Cou…

Rackspace, Us Inc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1634/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri PJ PardiwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri Kumar Sanjay, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…ector of IT (International Taxation) v. Morgan Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. 7. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 703 (Mad), where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under s. 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High Cou…

Hapag-Lloyd Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) RG 2(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1441/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1441/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Hapag –Lloyd Ag Dcit (It), 2(2)(2), Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, Air Ndia 1121 & 1122, बिधम/ Building, Nariman Point, Solitaire Corporate Park; Vs. Mumbai – 400 021. Building No. 11, 2Nd Floor, Chakala, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 093 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aafcp5834R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent :

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar & Ms
Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234BSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

…ctor of IT (International Taxation) vs. Morgan Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. 7. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. (1984) 149 ITR 703 (Mad), where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under s. 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High Cou…

M/S. Nagase & Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (I.T) - RG.-3(2), Mumbai

ITA 1800/MUM/2007[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999
For Appellant: S/Shri Nitesh Joshi & Manoj AnchaliaFor Respondent: Shri Dipak Ripote-Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 148Section 254(1)

…al Taxation) v. Morgan Corporation Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. 7. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court, in the case of CIT v. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. reported in [1984] 149 ITR 703, where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under section 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on the interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High…

Verizon Communications Singapore Pte Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1722/CHNY/2011[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT
Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

…s to deduct tax at source on such payments, if they considered the payments effected to the assessee as royalty for the use of or the right to use equipment. Relying on the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd 149 ITR 703, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that legislature never contemplated a situation where in respect of tax on a particular income, two persons were liable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of DIT(IT) vs. NGC Network Asia LLC (2009) 313 ITR ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 4 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11, CO 20 & 21…

M/S Verizon Communications Singapore Pte. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1507/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT
Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

…s to deduct tax at source on such payments, if they considered the payments effected to the assessee as royalty for the use of or the right to use equipment. Relying on the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd 149 ITR 703, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that legislature never contemplated a situation where in respect of tax on a particular income, two persons were liable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of DIT(IT) vs. NGC Network Asia LLC (2009) 313 ITR ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 4 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11, CO 20 & 21…

M/S Verizon Communications Singapore Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Mci Worldcom Asia Pvt. Ltd.), Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 164/CHNY/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT
Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

…s to deduct tax at source on such payments, if they considered the payments effected to the assessee as royalty for the use of or the right to use equipment. Relying on the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd 149 ITR 703, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that legislature never contemplated a situation where in respect of tax on a particular income, two persons were liable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of DIT(IT) vs. NGC Network Asia LLC (2009) 313 ITR ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 4 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11, CO 20 & 21…

M/S Verizon Communications Singapore Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Mci Worldcom Asia Pvt. Ltd.), Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1311/CHNY/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT
Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

…s to deduct tax at source on such payments, if they considered the payments effected to the assessee as royalty for the use of or the right to use equipment. Relying on the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd 149 ITR 703, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that legislature never contemplated a situation where in respect of tax on a particular income, two persons were liable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of DIT(IT) vs. NGC Network Asia LLC (2009) 313 ITR ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 4 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11, CO 20 & 21…

DDIT (It) 3(1), Mumbai vs. Hoyer Global Transport Bv, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross

ITA 7557/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalddit (It) 3(1) Vs. Hoyer Global Transport Bv R.No. 136, 1St Floor C/O Samsara Shipping P. Ltd. Sc India House, N.M. Rd 101-102, Technopolis Knowledge Ballard Estate Park, Mahakali Caves Rd Mumbai - 400038 Chakala Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 Pan No. Aaach9241F Cross Objection No. 43/Mum/2015 (In Ita No. 7555/Mum/2013) In Assessment Year: 2002-03 Hoyer Global Transport Bv Vs. Ddit (It) 3(1) R.No. 136, 1St Floor, Sc India C/O Samsara Shipping P. Ltd. 101-102, Technopolis Knowledge House, N.M. Rd. Park, Mahakali Caves Rd. Ballard Estate Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400038 &

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave,ARFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)

…irector of IT (International Taxation) vs. Morgan Guarantee International Finance Corporation, by applying the ratio of that judgment. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Fertilisers Ltd. (1984) 149 ITR 703 (Mad), where the Madras High Court took the view that the amount of tax deductible at source is to be taken into consideration to determine the liability to pay the interest under s. 215. In that case, the assessee had not paid advance tax on interest income. The payer of interest had not deducted the tax. The learned Bench of the Madras High Cou…