“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

Ram Niwas Yadav, Shahpura vs. Income Tax Officer Behror, Behror

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

ITA 275/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jaideep Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)Section 44A

highlight that the provisions of Sections 234A and 234B pertain to the levy of interest for defaults in furnishing returns or payment of advance tax, respectively, based on the assessed income or tax liability. Interest under Section 234A of the Income Tax Act, which pertains to the levy of interest ... interest under Section 234A lacks legal grounds in this scenario. Similarly, interest under Section 234B, imposed for delay or default in the payment of advance tax, is also inapplicable in the case at hand. The obligation to pay advance tax arises only when the total tax liability exceeds

M/S. Elite Realcon Pvt. Ltd.(Successor to Solid Information Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 681/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.681/Kol/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012) M/S Elite Realcon Private Ltd. Vs Ito, Ward-2(2), Kolkata (Successor To Solid Infracon Private Limited) 16 Ganesh Chandra Avenue, 7Th Floor, Kolkata Pan No. :Aacce 3338 C (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri C. Roy, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/05/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 29.03.2022, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1041881225(1) For The Assessment Year 2011-2012. 2. Shri C. Roy, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 404 Days For Which The Assessee Has Filed The Necessary Application For Condonation Of Delay. The Reasons Given In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay Are Found To Be Plausible & The Same Are Accepted & The Delay Of 404 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Disposed Off On Merits. 4. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Company Namely Solid Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Had Merged With Elite Realcon Pvt. Ltd., Vide

For Appellant: Shri C. Roy, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR

Transferee Company is expressly permitted to revise its income tax returns and related TDS certificates and shall be entitled to claim refund, advance tax credits, etc upon this Scheme becoming effective and has expressly reserved the right to make such revisions in the income tax refunds and related TDS certificates ... claim refund, advance tax credits, etc pursuant to this Scheme. 9. A perusal of page 39 of the paper book, being the Schedule of assets, shows in the case of assessee i.e. Solid Infracon Pvt. Ltd. which reads as follows :- 6 10. Now coming to the assessment order

Warangal Club, Hanamkonda vs. ITO, Ward-1, Warangal

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

ITA 109/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Praveen, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

Income tax Act, 1961 on the ground that, when assessee has not filed any return of income, an amount equal to the amount of advance tax payable shall be paid before filing the return of income. Since the appellant has not paid advance tax, the learned CIT(A) dismissed ... appreciating the fact that, the appellant being mutually aided club, it’s income is exempt from tax and not required to pay any advance tax. She further submitted that, the assessee did not file it's return of income due to various 5 ITA.No.109/Hyd./2025 reasons. However, the income

Shyam Sunder Gupta, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur

ITA 168/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 150Section 150(1)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251(2)Section 41(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

Shree Bhanvad Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Bhavnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(9), Bhavnagar

ITA 2117/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 249(4)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)

NFAC[CIT(A)], Delhi. (for short CIT(A)" dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-payment of amount equal to advance tax and thereby upholding the addition of Rs.4,51,568/- made by A.O. is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice ... grievously erred in law and or on facts in not appreciating that there was no liability to pay amount equal to the advance tax u/s 249(4) the income being non-taxable under the old State and Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2.2 That

Association of Consulting Civil Engineers, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer Guj-W-201-1, Rajkot

ITA 731/RJT/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.731/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Bakul Ganatra, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

applies, the appellant's income is not liable to tax, and, therefore, interest should not be imposed on exempt income. No Duty to Pay Advance Tax: It can be seen that since the appellant reasonably believed that its income was exempt, it did not foresee the need for advance tax

Shashi Prabha Singhania, Neemuch vs. Income-Tax Officer Neemuch, Neemuch

ITA 800/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 44ASection 80CSection 80D

unabsorbed losses from under Heed house property at Rs 393,700/- and same is set off during the year. 7. The assessee has deposited Advance tax during the year at Rs.2,00,000/- and IT refund is claimed out of advance tax. 8. All the bank statement is enclosed

Earth Reality, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 460/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Earth Reality Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Earth-49, Vs Vadodara. Opp: Misuza Court Vasna Road, Vadodara 390 007 Pan : Aadfe 0069 N (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Rs.2 crores, which was bifurcated between A.Y. 2012–13 (Rs.1,86,93,306/-) and A.Y. 2015–16 (Rs.14,00,000/-). Though the assessee paid advance tax of Rs.4,50,000/- on 25.03.2015 in respect of the sum of Rs.14,00,000/- , it failed to include the said income ... notice dated 17.04.2017 seeking explanation. The assessee responded vide letter dated 20.04.2017 stating that the omission to include the income and to claim the advance tax paid was inadvertent and unintentional. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the explanation and added Rs.14,00,000/- as unaccounted income. Assessment order became final

Rexel India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

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

ITA 981/PUN/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 May 2025

Section 143(2)Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation aggregating to INR 4,74,83,007 incurred by the Appellant in earlier years. 3. Credit of advance tax paid by YAPL and ADEPL not granted to the Appellant 3.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case ... NFAC has erred in not adjudicating on the ground taken by the Appellant for grant of credit of advance tax paid by YAPL and ADEPL amounting to INR 1,65,00,000/- and INR 86,00,000/- respectively to the Appellant. 4. Tax Deducted at Source ('TDS') credit of YAPL

Baderunnisa, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2572/BANG/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Mohammad Taher Shaikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 143(1)Section 194ISection 199

tax liability and the liability was distributed among the legal heirs in their inheritance ratio. Accordingly, individual tax liability was paid through payment of advance tax. The other legal hoers made full payment of their tax liability without claiming the credit of TDS. Therefore, the entire TDS credit was claimed ... sale consideration of the immovable property to the extent of the assessee’s share, without appreciating that the other legal heirs had paid advance tax on their respective capital gains. . Page 4 of 6 9. The learned AR further argued that the learned CIT(A) also erred in confirming

K.N.Krishnamurthy, Mumbai vs. Mum-W-(251)(93), Bengaluru

The appeal of the appellant is dismissed

ITA 5694/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) K.N. Krishnamurthy Ito 42(2)(3) I-15, Mahindra Park Mumbai. Narayan Nagar, Lbs Vs. Marg, Ghatkopar West Mumbai-400 086. Pan : Aaepk7294A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kiran UnavekarFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Krishamurthy

Section 234B

income which is anticipated at different points in time of the year, by an assessee nor is it practically feasible to assess the Advance Tax payable for interest credited by the Bank to the savings accounts of an Individual Taxpayer. A tax payer cannot be penalized under u/s 234B ... 234C for failure to deposit Advance tax quarterly for interest income to be accrued from Savings Bank accounts. Therefore, levy 2 K.N. Krishnamurthy of interest u/s 234B and 234C for failure to deposit Advance Tax towards interest income credited in savings Bank accounts is perhaps done without application of mind

Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal, Allahabad vs. Deputy/ACIT(Central), Allahabad

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

ITA 16/ALLD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the query raised by the assessing authority vide questionnaire issued under section 142 (1) dated 23.01.2021, in assessment proceedings for the AY 2018-19.

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Agarwal & Ms. VidishaFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115Section 115BSection 142Section 24Section 250Section 68Section 69

fact that he had unexplained investment to the extent of Rs. 1.85 Crores, the assessee did not pay 11 A.Y.2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal any advance tax prior to 31.03.2018 and also did not also pay self-assessment tax, prior to the filing of the return. It was submitted that ... submitted that the Revenue’s case was covered exactly by this decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the failure to deposit advance tax or even self-assessment Tax prior to the filing of the return, showed an attempt to conceal even after taking all the survey material. Furthermore

Prakash Ashokbhai Raninga, Porbandar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees (ITA No

ITA 265/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 264/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Arvind Durlabhji Jogia The Pr. Commissioner Of Vs. Ashapura Jewells, Kirti Mandir Income Tax, Jamnagar Income Tax Office, 4Th Floor Road, Porbandar Manek Centre, Nehru Road, Jamnagar - 361008 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Accpj0313M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.265/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Parekh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Section 115Section 115BSection 127(2)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

tax as per the regular slab applicable to individual i.e. @ 30% i.e Rs. 62,58,490/-. This tax is over and above advance tax already paid on my regular income." 9.2. We further noted that the assessee has filed return of income declaring net income

Arvind Durlabhji Jogia, Porbandar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees (ITA No

ITA 264/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 May 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Parekh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Section 115Section 115BSection 127(2)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

Pune Zilha Madhyawati Sakakak Pune, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 6(3), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Pune Zilla Madhyawati V The Income Tax Officer, Sakakak, S Ward-6(3), Pune. 92 Ranjan Co-Op Society, Shukrawar Peth, Shukrawar Peth S.O., Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaatp6962E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 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, 37[any relief allowable under section 89,] any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section

Paneerselvam Subramaniam, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 612/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.P.Guruprasad, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 249(4)

appeal as not maintainable for the reason that the assessee has not filed the return of income and not paid an amount of advance tax that was payable, as required u/s. 249(4) of the Act. The assessee is in appeal against the order as huge tax burden has been ... Departmental Representative (DR), has stated that assessee has been negligent before the A.O and has not paid the advance tax , therefore the Ld. CIT(A) order be confirmed. ITA No.612/Chny/2025 mB-: 5. | We have perused the materials available on record and find that assessment order has been ex-parte making

Manoj Prabhakar Kudtharkar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 2322/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: None

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

learned CIT(A) has erred in arriving at a conclusion that the appellant has failed to made payment of amount equal to the advance tax which is an incorrect interpretation of section 249(4) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances of the case 3. The Learned ... declared there at. 4. The Learned CIT (A) was not correct in not appreciating the facts that the Appellant was not required to pay advance tax as his total taxable income was less than the threshold limit of Rs.3,00,000/-. 5. The Learned CIT (A) was not correct

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Thane vs. Nakul Markhedkar, Thane

ITA 786/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan - Sr. DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)

value of the assets in the balance-sheet as reduced by any amount of tax paid as deduction or collection at source or as advance tax payment as reduced by the amount of tax claimed as refund under the Income-tax Act and any amount shown in the balance-sheet ... apart towards depreciation; (iv) any amount representing provision for taxation, other than amount of tax paid as deduction or collection at source or as advance tax payment as reduced by the amount of tax claimed as refund under the Income-tax Act, to the extent of the excess over

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Thane vs. Nakul Markhedkar, Thane

ITA 785/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan - Sr. DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)

Bhartabhai Der, Jetpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Aaykar Bhavan

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

ITA 856/RJT/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.856/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Bharatbhai Der, Income Tax Officer, Ward- At Village: Khajuri Gundala, 1(2)(3), Rajkot, Aaykar Vs. Jetpur, Dist. Rajkot 364 485 Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot 360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Cfppd 5240 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sumit Shingala, Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjunlal Saini Am; Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short “The Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 28.12.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Dated 15.10.2019, U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Shingala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 144

assessee, also submitted that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, simply on the reason that assessee did not pay the advance tax, however, the assessee is an agriculturalist, whose income is exempted from tax, therefore, he need not to deposit the advance tax. 3. On the other ... before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. The Assessee is an agriculturalist, therefore, he need not to pay the advance tax on his exempted income. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party