← All Phrases

“advance tax”

Chapter XVII - Collection & Recovery (Advance tax)Chapter XVII-CSection 2(1) / Chapter XVII-C / ITR Schedule IT1,785 judgments

The decision most relied on for advance tax is Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT (196 ITR 188), cited in 289 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on advance tax

Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT
196 ITR 188 · 1992 · Supreme Court
289
citing judgments

Provisions in taxing statutes that grant incentives, concessions, or exemptions for promoting economic growth and industrialization must be interpreted liberally and purposively. Any restrictions placed on such provisions should also be construed reasonably to advance their objective, not frustrate it.

DIT v. GE Packaged Power Inc.
373 ITR 65 · 2015 · High Court
199
citing judgments

Interest under section 234B for default in payment of advance tax is not leviable when the entire income is subject to tax deduction at source under section 195, as no advance tax liability arises for the assessee in such circumstances.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT
338 ITR 538 · 2011 · High Court
152
citing judgments

Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, which addresses deemed dividends, does not apply to loans or advances provided by a company to its shareholders if these transactions occur in the normal course of business, are driven by business expediency, or are made in consideration of a benefit conferred upon the company by the shareholder. Conversely, gratuitous loans or advances given to shareholders fall within the purview of this section.

DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC
313 ITR 187 · 2009 · High Court
144
citing judgments

Where a duty is cast on the payer to deduct and pay tax at source under Section 195, the payee-assessee cannot be levied interest under Section 234B for failure to pay advance tax if the payer defaults on its TDS obligation. This principle may also extend to interest under Section 234C.

Topman Exports v. CIT
342 ITR 49 · 2012 · Supreme Court
121
citing judgments

Export incentives, such as DEPB (Duty Entitlement Pass Book) and advance license benefits, constitute income taxable on an accrual basis under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act. Profit arising on the transfer of DEPB is not eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC.

CIT v. Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd.
318 ITR 476 · 2009 · High Court
119
citing judgments

Genuine trade advances or amounts advanced for bona fide business transactions, driven by commercial expediency, do not fall within the definition of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Raj Kumar
318 ITR 462 · 2009 · High Court
119
citing judgments

Genuine trade advances made by a company in the ordinary course of business to a shareholder do not fall within the definition of deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act.

Judgments citing advance tax

Jayarama Reddy Boopesh Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Bengaluru

ITA 706/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

learned CIT(A) raised a ground that the AO in arriving the tax liability has not correctly considered the prepaid taxes paid through advance tax, TDS and self-assessment tax. 24.1 The learned CIT(A) considered the argument of the assessee and held the issue of providing the credit ... learned CIT(A) that while computing the tax liability, the AO had failed to grant correct credit of prepaid taxes in the form of advance tax, TDS and self-assessment tax. The learned CIT(A) after examining the contention, rightly observed that grant of credit for prepaid taxes

Jayarama Reddy Boopesh Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Cirlce-2(4), Bengaluru

ITA 705/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. Aci 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6144/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

tax or interest is found due on the basis of such return, after adjustment of any tax deducted at source, any advance tax paid, any tax paid on self-assessment and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest, then, without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section

Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 382/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastav, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(1)(a)Section 251(2)

ITA No. 382/Ahd/2025 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Year -2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Jagdish Solanki, Jhabua vs. Income Tax Officer Jhabua, Jhabua

ITA 169/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Arrow Electronics India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 989/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 140BSection 140B(3)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 250

140B of the Act) and a net demand of Rs.6,59,53,600/- was determined as payable by the assessee after providing credit for advance tax of Rs.6,20,00,000/- TDS of Rs.6,54,750/- and TCS of Rs.93,401/-. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation passed

Arrow Electronics India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 988/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 140BSection 140B(3)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 250

140B of the Act) and a net demand of Rs.6,59,53,600/- was determined as payable by the assessee after providing credit for advance tax of Rs.6,20,00,000/- TDS of Rs.6,54,750/- and TCS of Rs.93,401/-. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation passed

JCIT(OSD) Central Circle 1, Jhandewalan vs. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

ITA 1085/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

Woolcombers of India Ltd.'s case (supra) the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the overdraft account of the assessee and In such a case it should be presumed that

Sp Armada Oil Exploration Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6575/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailsp Armada Oil Exploration Private Limited 404, Trade Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051. Pan: Aaqcs7983P ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Butani a/w Shri Pratik PoddarFor Respondent: Shri. Pravin Salunkhe & Shri Aditya M. Rai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 253(1)Section 92C(1)Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)

material available on record. As per provisions of section 234C of the Act, the interest is levied either on failure to pay the advance tax by the assessee or on shortfall in payment of advance tax as compared to tax due on the returned income. Thus, it is pertinent

Gyan Vikas Samiti, Ambedkar Nagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

ITA 8/ALLD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: (Application)For Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 249(4)Section 253(3)

erred in dismissing the appeal, by not issuing any show cause notice, on the ground of not paying due advance tax by the appellant whereas the admitted tax liability is ‘NIL’ and the appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under ... erred in disallowing the appeal, by not issuing any show cause notice, on the ground of not paying due advance tax by the appellant whereas the admitted tax liability is ‘NIL’ and the appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under

Gyan Vikas Samiti, Ambedkar Nagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

ITA 7/ALLD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: (Application)For Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 249(4)Section 253(3)

erred in dismissing the appeal, by not issuing any show cause notice, on the ground of not paying due advance tax by the appellant whereas the admitted tax liability is ‘NIL’ and the appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under ... erred in disallowing the appeal, by not issuing any show cause notice, on the ground of not paying due advance tax by the appellant whereas the admitted tax liability is ‘NIL’ and the appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under

Pruthvi Himanshu Shah, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(3)(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 1320/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Us, As

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR
Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250

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 to him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause(b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the [Joint Commissioner ... have mentioned the same remark. The Ld. CIT(A) further goes on note the provisions of law requiring the assessee to have paid all advance taxes which he was liable to pay where no return of income is filed, as a necessary pre-requisite for admitting appeals by the First

Chattanathan Devarajan, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 34(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4976/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Chattanathan Devarajan Income Tax Officer - 34(1)(1) 1101, Raheja Tipco Heights Mumbai Rani Sati Marg, Vs. Malad East Mumbai – 400067 (Pan: Abjpc6332P) (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 192Section 194Section 194ASection 271(1)(c)

applies, the amount of tax sought to be evaded shall be the tax on the total income assessed as reduced by the amount of advance tax, tax deducted at source, tax collected at source and self- assessment tax paid before the issue of notice under section 148.” 6.1. From ... evaded shall be the tax on the total income assessed, as reduced by the amount of 7 Chattanathan Devarajan AY 2014-15 advance tax, TDS, TCS and self-assessment tax paid before the issue of notice u/s.148. We note that the present case is covered by Explanation 3 which mentions

Naik Naik and Co, Mumbai vs. ACIT -16(3), Mumbai

In the result we hold that the assessee is entitled to credit of TDS to the extent deduction from its receipts is established on the basis of the contemporaneous material placed on record

ITA 2915/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

duly offered to tax. Second, whether interest charged under sections 234B and 234C is sustainable when there is no default in payment of advance tax, the entire liability already having been met through TDS. 3. The assessee is a well-regarded law firm providing legal services to multiple clients ... interest ₹8,12,300, aggregating to ₹7,12,79,941. Against this liability, the assessee claimed credit of TDS of ₹4,80,45,747, advance tax of ₹2,20,00,000, and self-assessment tax of ₹12,34,194. 4. The assessee maintains its accounts on cash basis. Payments received

M/S Public Education Board Rewari, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2988/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarm/.S Public Education Board Rewari, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O. Kishan Lal Public Col, Delhi Exemption Ward, Road, Rewari, Haryana-123401 Rohtak (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabap5553F

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 102Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

unadmitted by applying the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act M/.s Public Education Board Rewari stating that assessee had not deposited advance tax on the income. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the outset, we find that the appeal has been preferred ... admission of any income by the assessee in the entire proceedings for the year under consideration. While this is so, there cannot be any advance tax liability that could be fastened on the assessee. Once there is no question of payment of advance tax, the provisions of section

Anjana Construction, Nimbahera vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 455/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

seized. However, as regards the said cash which was found, the respondent/assessee had filed his Income-tax Return including the said cash as advance tax, and the same was also accepted by the Income-tax Department. Even the cross-examination of all the parties involved also proves that clearly

Anjana Construction, Nimbahera vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 453/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

seized. However, as regards the said cash which was found, the respondent/assessee had filed his Income-tax Return including the said cash as advance tax, and the same was also accepted by the Income-tax Department. Even the cross-examination of all the parties involved also proves that clearly

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur vs. Anjana Construction, Chittorgarh

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 313/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

seized. However, as regards the said cash which was found, the respondent/assessee had filed his Income-tax Return including the said cash as advance tax, and the same was also accepted by the Income-tax Department. Even the cross-examination of all the parties involved also proves that clearly

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Trishul Developers, Bangalore

ITA 766/BANG/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3293/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

Less: Credit u/s 91 Less: Tax Deducted Source 2,72,18,632 Balance Payable 3,40,75,09,456 Less: Advance Tax paid June 15, 2017 40,00,00,000 Sept