← 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

Griptonite Games India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

ITA 199/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-
Section 143(3)Section 144(5)Section 92C

Apropos the claim of the assessee company that the AO while computing the tax demand had erred in not granting the advance tax credit, despite the fact that the same was disclosed in its 26AS, we are of the view that as the said issue will require necessary verification, therefore ... look into the matter. If the claim of the assessee company is found to be in order, then credit of the amount of the advance tax deposited by the assesssee company be allowed as per the extant law. 34. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. Formula One Marketing II Limited, United Kingdom

ITA 5092/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 148Section 154Section 195Section 209Section 234ASection 234B

without taking into consideration the ITA No.- 5092/Del/2024 Formula One Marke"ng II Limited fact that the asssessee was in default for payment of advance tax even after being aware of the fact that no TDS was deducted on the income received by it. 2. Whether on the facts ... Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short), without taking into consideration the fact that the assessee / respondent was in default for payment of advance tax even after being aware of the fact that no TDS was deducted on the income received by it and also erroneously relied upon

Datia Vishvanath Trading Company, Sheetla Ganj Indergarh vs. Central Circle Gwalior, Main Building, Gwalior

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

ITA 171/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)

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 Commissioner (Appeals

Pradeep Singh Aswal, Madhya Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2) Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh

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

ITA 164/AGR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

challenging the additions made by AO, assessee challenged the appellate order where the appeal of the assessee is not admitted for non-payment of advance tax though the assessee is not having taxable income. Since the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine thus ... assessee carried matter in first- appeal. The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of payment of advance tax as per the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Against this order of ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before Tribunal

Trenistone D Sangma, Ampati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Goalpara

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 285/GTY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ashok Sharma, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jha, JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149(4)(b)Section 250Section 69A

before the Tribunal. 6. We observe that, the ld. CIT(A) did not entertain the appeal of the assessee due to non-payment of advance tax as per section 149(4)(b) of the Act. The assessee was enquired by the ld. CIT(A) whether the assessee has paid tax ... added the entire amount to the total income of the assessee. Secondly, his appeal was not admitted due to non-payment of advance tax. 6.2 We observe that, the assessee is a member of the Scheduled Tribe community of the State of Meghalaya and his income may be exempted from

Rise Worldwide Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1749/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rise Worldwide Ltd., Dy. Cit Circle-4(2)(1), 3Rd Floor, Court House, Lokmanya Aayakar Bhavan, Maharashi Vs. Tilak Dhobi Talao, Karve Road, Mumbai-400002. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aalcs 6150 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Akhtar Hussain Ansari, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Nimesh Vora
Section 143(1)Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H (SMC)” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI

DCIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Hebe Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2455/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

account of payer only at year end and tax is deducted at source simultaneously. Meaning thereby the payee company need to pay advance tax as it would get credit of TDS as per law in due course of time. However, in the present case both the payee and payer company ... paid advance tax periodically meaning thereby the department has got revenue periodically as against getting TDS at the end of financial year." In the assessment order the AO has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Embassy Development Corporations Assistant Commissioner of Income

Divey Dipti Chopra, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Delhi

ITA 5443/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 249(4)(b)

section 249(4)(b) of the Act for rejecting the assessee’s lower appeal in limine for want of a payment of his admitted advance tax. 4. Learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that there is no indication in the CIT(A)/NFAC’s order quantifying the assessee’s liability ... advance tax or any prior notice or opportunity granted to him to this clinching effect. 5. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject

Divey Dipti Chopra, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Delhi

ITA 5442/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 249(4)(b)

section 249(4)(b) of the Act for rejecting the assessee’s lower appeal in limine for want of a payment of his admitted advance tax. 4. Learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that there is no indication in the CIT(A)/NFAC’s order quantifying the assessee’s liability ... advance tax or any prior notice or opportunity granted to him to this clinching effect. 5. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject

Sanjeev Kumar Garg, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 20, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 130/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2019-20]

Section 115BSection 131Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271ASection 69A

Narendra N Thakker Vs Department of Income Tax in IT(SS)A No.01/Kol/2012 it was held it is beyond doubt that the terms 'Advance Tax' and 'Self Assessment Tax' are distinct and separate. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Kolkata in case of Nitin Kumar Vs ACIT ... illegal. The provisions of section 132B of the Act makes it clear that the terms ‘existing liability’ does not include advance tax payable in accordance with the provisions of Part C of Chapter XVII. But this amendment was brought in the statute by Finance Act 2013 with effect from

Laxmi Babu Debnath, Pune vs. ITO Ward 7(1), Pune

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

ITA 536/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.535 & 536/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Laxmi Babu Debnath, V The Income Tax Officer, Level 3, Riverside Business S Ward-7(1), Pune. Bay, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune – 411001. Maharashtra. Pan: Acypd2630F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Thakkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeal Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. We Treat Appeal In

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 250Section 57

under : “6. Since the appellant has not filed valid return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by it, present appeal is not liable to be admitted. The appeal is infructuous and is, therefore, dismissed.” 2.1 Thus, ld.CIT ... Nos.535 & 536/PUN/2025 [A] (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

Laxmi Babu Debnath, Pune vs. ITO Ward 7(1), Pune

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

ITA 535/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.535 & 536/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Laxmi Babu Debnath, V The Income Tax Officer, Level 3, Riverside Business S Ward-7(1), Pune. Bay, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune – 411001. Maharashtra. Pan: Acypd2630F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Thakkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeal Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. We Treat Appeal In

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 250Section 57

under : “6. Since the appellant has not filed valid return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by it, present appeal is not liable to be admitted. The appeal is infructuous and is, therefore, dismissed.” 2.1 Thus, ld.CIT ... Nos.535 & 536/PUN/2025 [A] (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

Wildernest Better Living & Maintenance Co-Operative Society Limited, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 856/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.856/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Wildernest Better Living V The Income Tax Officer, Maintenance Co-Operative S Ward-6(1), Pune. Society Limited, Plot No.58, 59 & 60, Woldernest Society, Khadakwasla, Taluka Haveli, Pune – 411024. Maharashtra. Pan: Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Arpit Dnyandeo Dambhare & Shri Deepak Sasar – Ca’S Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Panaji Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2021-22 Dated

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

tax, interest and fee, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under section 89, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section

Sahyogh Nagri Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Jalna vs. ITO Ward-1, Jalna

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

ITA 36/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.36/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sahyogh Nagri Sahkari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Jalna. Patsanstha Maryadit, 17/85, Juna Monda Mahesh Nagar, Ambad, Dist. Jalna-431203. Pan : Abmfs8514J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prateek Jha Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 04.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.11.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Cooperative Credit Society & Has Not Furnished Its Return Of Income For The Period Under Consideration. On The Basis Of Information Available With The Department, It Was Noticed That The Assessee Has Deposited

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

Since the appellant has offered no comments at serial no.9 of From 35 and appellant failed to make payment of amount equal to the advance tax which was due on its income and the appellant also did not requested for exemption ... /NFAC 3 dismissed the appeal of the assessee, without admitting the same for adjudication, on the sole ground of non-payment of advance tax in accordance with section 249(4)(b) of the IT Act. In this regard, we are of the considered opinion that the advance tax

Lintas Employees Hobbies and Craft Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1802/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 10(15)Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K (SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Lintas Employees Hobbies and Craft Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1801/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Gada, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 10(15)Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K (SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Viacom 18 Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 16(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1002/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt.Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(3)Section 153(5)Section 244Section 244ASection 244A(1)(a)

r.w.s. 220(2) of the Act to support its contention.It is submitted that,when the assessee defaultstowards payment of interest on anon payment of advance tax, interest is payable u/s.234B and C. The provision is clear to the extent that the amount paid shall first be adjusted towards the interest

Rajesh Kanjibhai Koriya, Upleta vs. The ITO Ward 1 (2) (2) Rajkot, Rajkot

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 165/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.165/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Dipen Sukhdia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 250

appeal against. 7. The order before CIT(A) and then CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal on the ground of non payment of advance tax. 8. I have no idea whatsoever regarding any communication of CIT(A) nor order of CIT(A) which was passed ... assessee immediately forwarded to him. Thereafter assessee’s tax consultant filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who unadmitted appeal due to non payment of advance tax. u/s 249(4) of the Act and order was passed by Ld.CIT(A), on 29.01.2024. At the time of filing appeal, the assessee

ACIT Circle 3, Lucknow vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 141/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Before Shri Kul Bharat & Before Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyshri Nikhil Choudharyshri Nikhil Choudharyita Nos. 112 To 114/Lkw/2024 A.Ys. 2015-16 To 2017-18 Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Vs. Dcit Bank Ltd P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. 226001. Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 226006 Pan:Aaaar1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) A.Y.2016-17 Acit Circle-3 Vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh Ltd Kar Bhawan, Lucknow Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 226006 Pan: Aaaar1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Addl. Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: Date Of Pronouncement: 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Bench.: These Four Appeals Have Been Have Been Filed For The Assessment Years 2015 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016- 17 & 2017-18 By The Assessee & Revenue Ssessee & Revenue Against The Respective Orders Of The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024 Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024. While The Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024 Assessee Is In Appeal In Assessment Years 2015 Assessee Is In Appeal In Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18, The Revenue 18, The Revenue

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 36(1)(v)

income as per the return i.e. at Rs.1,47,07,819/- for the purposes of computation. The said profit was before deducting provision for advance tax at Rs.30,00,000/-. It is true that they had made a provision for income tax at Rs.30,00,000/- in the audited profit ... offered in the return. Thus, the taxable income of the bank was Rs.1,47,07,819/- and ITA. No.141/LKW/2024 this included the provision for advance tax of Rs.30,00,000/-. Without appreciating the same, the Ld. AO had added this back and this amounted to a double addition

Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow vs. Dy.CIT, Lucknow

ITA 114/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

income as per the return i.e. at Rs.1,47,07,819/- for the purposes of computation. The said profit was before deducting provision for advance tax at Rs.30,00,000/-. It is true that they had made a provision for income tax at Rs.30,00,000/- in the audited profit ... been offered in the return. Thus, the taxable income of the bank was Rs.1,47,07,819/- 4 this included the provision for advance tax of Rs.30,00,000/-. Without appreciating the same, the Ld. AO had added this back and this amounted to a double addition