“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

Varun Trade Link Private Limited, Kolkata vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 401/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 68

return of income in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act and not paid the amount equivalent to the amount of advance tax payable by it, the appeal was not liable to be admitted and became infructuous. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee ... under: “249(4)(b): 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 by him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this

Priya Construction, Namakkal vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1200/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1200/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2020-21 M/S. Priya Construction, The Deputy Commissioner 1/8, Senthilagam, Vs. Of Income Tax, Kadachanallur, Central Circle, Pallipalayam Post, Salem. Iyenthupanai, Tiruchengode Tk, Namakkal – 638 008. Pan: Aahfp 8616N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Bipin C.N., Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N., CIT

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263

current Financial Year 2019-20. I will herewith finalize the books of accounts by paying the balance of the entire tax amount as Advance Tax by the end of this month, besides the TDS (Tax Deducted at Source). Besides, the above-mentioned firm has been changed into a company under ... above mentioned turnover of Rs.44,07,00,000/- amounts to Rs.3,52,56,000/- as income. I hereby assure that I shall pay the advance tax amount (after deducting TDS) by the end of this month in the account of the company and I shall hereby submit the copy

Rajinder Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer, Mansa

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

ITA 310/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Sh. K. R. Jain, Adv

Section 147Section 148Section 208Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69A

income u/s 69A of the Act). 4. The matter carried in appeal has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) for non- payment of advance tax, coupled with the fact that no income tax return has been filed. 5. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal ... should have issued an opportunity of hearing before dismissing the appeal by refusing to admit the same on the grounds of non-payment of advance tax being hit by provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, when on the facts of the instant case, no advance tax

Akhilesh Kumar Patel, Shahdol vs. Income Tax Officer Dhar, Dhar

ITA 627/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 147

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

Vijayalakshmi, Legal Heir of Late Shri K.S. Venugopal, Telangana vs. ITO, Ncw-3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1499/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V. Elangovan, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)

However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee had not made payment of the advance tax as required under section 249(4) of the Act. 5. Before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) submitted that the deceased assessee, along with his family members

Mithlesh Kumar Tripathi, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(4), Delhi

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

ITA 4955/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)

documentation impress that certain portion of the amounts lent by the company to the appellant relates to expenses incurred by the appellant relates to advance tax payment incurred on behalf of the company. 4.10 However, the closing debit balance is Rs.30,28,000/-, proves that this sum of Rs.30

Rajendra Prasad, Palamau, Satbarwa vs. ITO, Daltonganj

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

ITA 26/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2018-19 Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Vs. Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ramghat, Ramghat, Palamau, Palamau, Satbarwa-822126 822126 Pan/Gir No. . (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017- 18/10212042 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Rajat Essee. Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, ld CIT DR

Section 207Section 208Section 210Section 249(4)(b)

ground that the assessee has not paid the ound that the assessee has not paid the amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him no amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him no amount equal to the amount ... advance tax which was payable by him no P a g e 1 | 3 Assessment Year : 2018-19 return of income has been filed. It was the submission that this issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Amritsar Bench in the case

Muppalla Padmavathi, Guntur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Guntur

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

ITA 396/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 396/Viz/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Muppalla Padmavathi V. Income Tax Officer - Ward – 2(1) D.No. 8-188 Topu Kornepadu Guntur Medical College Road Vatticherukuru Mandal Guntur – 522004 Andhra Pradesh Guntur - 522017 [Pan:Foipm1273L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 147Section 148

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 by him:] Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the Joint Commissioner ... section 249 of the Act would apply where no return has been filed by the assessee. However, at the same time the payment of advance tax would also always be subject to there being a taxable income which according to the assessee he had not earned any taxable income

Kadavath Peedikayil Ashraf, Kannur vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-3, Kannur

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 513/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Neethu S, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 208Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 271ASection 271BSection 44A

Year 2019-2020 B. That the Learned CIT(A) grossly erred in law in holding that the appeal is infructuous for non-payment of advance tax without appreciating that the provisions of section 249 (4) (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which require payment of advance tax ... record. 4. Paragraph Nos. 7.4 to 9 of the order impugned read as under: “7.4. Section 208 "208. Conditions of liability to pay advance tax Advance tax shall be payable during a financial year in every case where the amount of such tax payable by the assessee during that year

Mahendrakumar Bhanjibhai Chhaniyara, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward 1 (2) (1) Rajkot, Rajkot

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

ITA 280/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 280/Rjt/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: (2016-17) Mahendrakumar Bhanjibhai Income Tax Officer, Chaniyara, Gaushala Plot, Kolki बनाम Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot, Aaykar Rajkot, Kolki So, Bhawan, Rajkot-360001 /Vs. Rajkot-360470 स्थायी लेखा सं./जी आइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Astpc9150G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारितीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ld. A.R. राजस्वकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. D.R. सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2025 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Order (Ay) 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) (In Short "Ld.Cit(A)",Dated 12.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Act, Dated 28.02.2024. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 210Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271F

Mahendrakumar Bhanjibhai Chaniyara 11. That the appellant has neither committed default of Sec. 210 nor made any default in payment of advance tax and therefore unwanted interest charged us 234A 234B, 234Cand 234D requires to be deleted. 12. Your appellant craves leave to add, amend, deleted or alter

Gujarat Technological University, Ahmedabad, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 Exemptions, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

computed without such exemption, and tax was determined at normal rates along with interest under sections 234B and 234C. After giving credit for advance tax of Rs. 26,869/-, a demand of Rs. 69,40,22,390/- was raised. The order also indicated that the reasons for variance/demand were available

Zaffer Ullah Shah S/O Sh Abdul Gani Shah Khokhar Complex Distt Police Line Street Doda 182201, Distt Doda vs. Income Tax Office Ward 2(4) Udhampur 103-Ward 10 Dhar Road Udhampur, Udhampur

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

ITA 87/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 87/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

appeal and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by refusing to admit the same for adjudication on merits for non-payment of advance tax (admitted tax) coupled with fact that no return of income has been filed resulting in a violation of provisions of section ... amount of Rs.2.67 lakhs on 15.02.2020 (copy of challan is also enclosed). The amount paid is certainly much more than the calculation of advance tax (admitted tax) required for filing of the appeal as provision of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. As such, we are of the opinion

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Rajbagh Srinagar

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 166/ASR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs

Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

appeals are that the Ld. first appellate authority has dismissed the appeals without admitting the same for hearing on merits for non-payment of advance tax coupled with the fact that the assessee has not filed any return for the years under appeal, thereby violating the provisions of section ... provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, 1961, because in the instant case no returns are filed by the assessee and no advance taxes as payable has been paid and the assessee has not even filed any application as 4 I.T.A. Nos. 158, 161 and 166/Asr/2025 Assessment Year

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Rajbagh

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 161/ASR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs

Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

Abdul Hamid Nachar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Rajbagh Srinagar

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 158/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs

Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

Charanjit Singh, Jalandhar vs. ITO- W-4(2), Jalandhar

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

ITA 681/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv

Section 147Section 148Section 208Section 210Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

appeal has been dismissed by the ld. first appellate authority on the grounds that no return of income has been filed and no advance tax has been paid and incorrect information has been stated in Form No. 35 (row no. 9) (where the assessee has offered comments as not applicable ... Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a deed writer and as per the assessee’s own calculation no advance tax is payable and he further submitted that the payment of advance tax by the assessee is of his own 3 I.T.A. No. 681/Asr/2024 Assessment

Bikram Masih, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 569/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)

Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

received from the office of the ld. first appellate authority. He further submitted that the appellate order dismissing the appeal (for non-payment of advance tax) has not been issued to the said e-mail id, and as such, the assesee was totally unaware of the outcome of the said ... grounds of rejection of the appeal by the ld. first appellate authority refusing to admit the same for non-payment of advance tax in this case, where no return is filed resulting in violation of the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. We find from the record

Kalkere Puttaraju Vajramunie, Royal Hermitage, Kalkere B.O, Kalkere vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Bangalore, Bangalore, Karnataka

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

ITA 902/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) in a situation where the assessee fails to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him in the absence of return filed by him. Admittedly, the return was not filed by the assessee but the assessee ... statement of income disclosing taxable income of Rs. 24,55,060/- only. However, the assessee has not deposited an amount equal to the advance tax till the date of disposal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, in our considered . ITA No.901 & 902/Bang/2025 Page 16 of 17 view

Kalkere Puttaraju Vajramunie, Royal Hermitage, Kalkere B.O, Kalkere vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Bangalore, Bangalore, Karnataka

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

ITA 901/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

Cisco Systems (India) Private Limited, Bnagalore vs. DCIT- Circle 2(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1891/BANG/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavit(Tp)A No.1891/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Cisco Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sez Unit Kadubeesanahalli Village, Of Income Tax, Bellandur S.O. Kadabeesanahalli, Circle – 2(2)(1), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcc 0258 Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Respondent By : Dr. Divya K. J, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 11.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K. J, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 143(3)Section 234A

Ground No.5 was not pressed and hence dismissed. 7. Ground No.6 is with regard to non-consideration of the fact that assessee has paid advance tax amounting to Rs.35 Crores and credit for the same was not IT(TP) A No.1891/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 granted. The learned Authorized Representative ... After hearing both the parties, we direct the learned Assessing Officer to verify the same and grant credit of the above sum as advance tax after verification of challan. Accordingly, ground No.6 of the appeal is allowed. 9. Ground Nos.7 and 8 are with respect to levy of interest under