← 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

DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd., ( Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1174/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

jurisdictional High Court and also the coordinate bench of this Tribunal have held that, the assessee was not liable to pay advance tax in case of MAT computed u/s 115JB of the Act, in the years prior to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd., ( Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1173/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

jurisdictional High Court and also the coordinate bench of this Tribunal have held that, the assessee was not liable to pay advance tax in case of MAT computed u/s 115JB of the Act, in the years prior to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

Superdeal Resources Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 726/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Superdeal Resources Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Wad 5(1), Kolkata C/O Subash Agarwal & Ito, Ward 5(1), Associates, Advocates Sidha Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Vs. Chowringhee Square, 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-70069 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcs7472E Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 68

offered a summary discloser of income as undisclosed and the department accepted the summary surrender of income and thereafter advance tax for the said surrendered of income was also deposited, but thereafter it was contended by the assessee that the surrender was made under threat or coercion and that

Lakhmi Chand Khushiramani, Gwalior vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Gwalior

ITA 284/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 294(4)(b)Section 69A

dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee did not pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax, which was payable on or before filing the appeal. This comment was made by the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of assessee's answer ... that the appeal shall not be admitted, unless the appellant has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him if no return of income has been filed. In view of these facts, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal being not eligible

Pradeep Kumar Rochwani, Jodhpur vs. Circle (Intl Tax), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 567/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, Adv. (throughFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 263

return or not, Whether TDS claimed are reflecting in the Form 26AS of not, whether the assessee had actually paid any excess advance tax or not & the reasons for claiming the refund. In the present case, the AO completed the assessment on the sole presumption that that the assessee

Ashok Nariyani, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-5, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1532/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh.Deepak Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

PCIT has failed to appreciate that the assessee reflected the surrendered income as other income in his return of income and paid the advance tax on it and he never at the time of survey proceedings or thereafter admitted that income surrendered was unexplained stock and unexplained cash

Shri Ambai Gramin Bigarsheti Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit Radhanagari, Radhanagari Kolhapur vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Kolhapur

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

ITA 401/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69ASection 80P

dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes observing that in view of section 249(4)(b) of the Act the assessee has not deposited the Advance Tax payable by it and therefore appeal cannot be admitted for adjudication. 7. I find that the assessee is a Cooperative Society and is claiming ... case that in the immediately preceding assessment year, assessee society had a tax liability based on which the Advance Tax was required to be deposited for A.Y. 2017-18. Therefore, the observation of ld.CIT(A) invoking 249(4)(b) of the 3 Shri Ambai Gramin Bigarsheti Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit

Shri Madho Tiwari, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward - 23(4), Hooghly Now I.T.O., Ward - 23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 2065/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Madho Tiwari, 432, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 23(1), Srikrishna Nagar, Pravash Hoogly. Nagar, Rishra, Hooghly, W.B Pan/Gir No.Admpt 4685 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sounitra Choudhury, Adv Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sounitra Choudhury, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

Assessing officer has passed assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act computing the tax payable at Rs.6,87,580/- which includes the advance tax payable by the assessee as well as the interest on account of delayed payment of advance tax. In the appeal ... assessee failed to comply with the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) as he had not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax that was payable by him. Hence, the assessee has filed in the instant appeal and in the absence of any representation before

Sangeetaben Bharatkumar Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4668/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantms Suchitra Kamblesangeeta Bharatkumar Mehta, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 2Nd Floor, Ward-19(1)(1), 78-80 Gora Gandhi Building, Mumbai. C.P, Tank Road, Mumbai-400004. [Pan :Aftpm1095 B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punamiya, Ar Respondent By: Shri Vivek Perampura, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 O R D E R Per Suchitra Kamble:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampura, CIT. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 210Section 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

requires to be dropped. 14. That the appellant has neither committed default of Sec. 210 nor made any default in payment of advance tax and therefore unwanted interest charged u/s.234A, 234B, 234C and 234D requires to be deleted. 15. Your appellant craves leave to add, amend, deleted or alter

Millennium Contrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 424/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 68Section 69C

case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erroneously held that the assessee did not file valid return of income and has not paid advance tax payable by him before filing appeal. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has unilaterally rejected the appeal of the assessee in violation of principles of natural ... preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal as the assessee had failed to pay the advance tax before filing the appeal. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Rival

Godrej Projects North Star LLP, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle41(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4258/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 140Section 140ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234B(2)Section 250Section 39Section 94

this section; 2. thereafter, interest shall be calculated at the rate aforesaid on the amount by which the tax so paid together with the advance tax paid falls short of the assessed tax." As per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, in cases where Self- Assessment Tax ... been paid, the law mandates that any interest liability arising on account of late payment or short payment of advance tax- specifically under Sections 234B and 234C-must first be adjusted or recovered from the SAT amount. Only after such interest dues are recovered can the remaining balance

Ap Goyal Charitable Trust, East Delhi, Delhi India vs. ITO, Civic Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2038/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2Section 249(4)

assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) by not admitting the appeal of the assessee u/s 249(4) of the Act, as no advance tax was paid by the assessee. He, therefore, submits that the appeal of the assessee should not be admitted for adjudication. Regarding the limitation issue ... file the return of income though its income exceeds the minimum amount not chargeable to tax and, therefore, the assessee is liable to pay advance tax and appeal was not admitted in terms of Section 249(4) (b) of the Act. The assessee before us in ground appeal No.17 challenged

Yajuvendra Arjunbhai Dodiya, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 428/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.428/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Yajuvendra Arjunbhai Dodiya The Ito बनाम/ 34, Parimal Park, Iocl Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Colony Road Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 382 150 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Agapd 6830 B (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohan Thakkar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 28/12/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-2019. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal, Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Of Rs.39,95,720/- Being The Amount Of Commission Received By The Assessee From Tirth Agro Technology Pvt.Ltd. As Reflected In Form 26-As. The Ao Further Yajuvendra Arjunbhai Dodiya Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Thakkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250

Ld.CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal of the assessee confirming that the assessee neither had filed any return of income nor had deposited any advance tax. 3. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Ld.CIT(A), assessee has come in appeal before us. 4. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee ... that since there was no taxable income of the assessee, which had escaped assessment, therefore, it was not a case of deposit of any advance tax as alleged by the Ld.CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the record. Since the lower

Shantha Alias Shanthamma, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

ITA 465/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Deepak, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan M, CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 153C

Mantri Premiro Projects” on which received consideration of Rs. 7,53,77,252/- and Rs. 8,52,88,148/- respectively but not paid advance tax on the same. Hence, the AO treated the receipt of Rs. 7,53,77,252/- and Rs. 8,52,88,148/- as business income

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1637/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

paper book. Referring to page 3 of the paper book he drew the attention of the Bench to the payment of advance tax of Rs.2 crore and self assessment tax of Rs.10.5 + Rs.3.14 crores. Referring to page 4 of the paper book for assessment year 2014-15, he submitted that ... assessee has paid advance tax of Rs.9.18 crores including TDS and self assessment tax of Rs.2.46 crores. Referring to pages 5 and 6 of the paper book for assessment year 2015-16, he submitted that the assessee has paid advance tax including TDS of Rs.3.20 crores and self assessment tax

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1636/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

paper book. Referring to page 3 of the paper book he drew the attention of the Bench to the payment of advance tax of Rs.2 crore and self assessment tax of Rs.10.5 + Rs.3.14 crores. Referring to page 4 of the paper book for assessment year 2014-15, he submitted that ... assessee has paid advance tax of Rs.9.18 crores including TDS and self assessment tax of Rs.2.46 crores. Referring to pages 5 and 6 of the paper book for assessment year 2015-16, he submitted that the assessee has paid advance tax including TDS of Rs.3.20 crores and self assessment tax

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1635/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

paper book. Referring to page 3 of the paper book he drew the attention of the Bench to the payment of advance tax of Rs.2 crore and self assessment tax of Rs.10.5 + Rs.3.14 crores. Referring to page 4 of the paper book for assessment year 2014-15, he submitted that ... assessee has paid advance tax of Rs.9.18 crores including TDS and self assessment tax of Rs.2.46 crores. Referring to pages 5 and 6 of the paper book for assessment year 2015-16, he submitted that the assessee has paid advance tax including TDS of Rs.3.20 crores and self assessment tax

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

ITA 1634/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

paper book. Referring to page 3 of the paper book he drew the attention of the Bench to the payment of advance tax of Rs.2 crore and self assessment tax of Rs.10.5 + Rs.3.14 crores. Referring to page 4 of the paper book for assessment year 2014-15, he submitted that ... assessee has paid advance tax of Rs.9.18 crores including TDS and self assessment tax of Rs.2.46 crores. Referring to pages 5 and 6 of the paper book for assessment year 2015-16, he submitted that the assessee has paid advance tax including TDS of Rs.3.20 crores and self assessment tax

Nadur Siddaganagaiah Chandrakanth, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 558/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri R. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 69A

appeal. He submits that assessee has neither filed return of income disclosing any income on which assessee is supposed to pay any advance tax and therefore the dismissal of the appeal stating that assessee has not paid admitted tax in terms of section ... provisions of section 249(4) of the Act, assessee is required to pay tax on the returned income or amount equivalent to the advance tax as per returned income. As assessee has not filed any return of income nor admitted any income, his appeal should have been admitted. Even otherwise

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4633/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt.Renu Jauhri

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 237Section 244ASection 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(1)(b)Section 246ASection 246A(1)(b)Section 246A(1)(i)

244A(1)(a) to deny the Appellant interest u/s 244A of the Act. 3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that once excess advance tax and TDS are adjusted with tax liability arising out of order passed u/s 143(1) or 143(3), it loses the character of advance tax ... applicable to the refund arising to the appellant and appellant is entitled to interest as per section 244A(1)(b). c. Once excess advance tax and TDS is adjusted with tax liability arising out of regular assessment, it loses the character of advance tax and TDS and becomes tax paid