“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

Deepshikha Trading Company Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1957/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

that the National Faceless Appeal Centre ("Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC") erred in not granting the TDS credit of INR 1,23,331 and Advance Tax of INR 1,75,000 pertaining to the amalgamating company as per the order passed by the Faceless Assessment Centre ("Ld. AO") under Section ... facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not granting TDS credit and Advance Tax of Rs. 1,23,331 and Rs. 1,75,000 respectively, which was claimed by the appellant in the return on the ground that the said

Flemingo Liners Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Wqard-15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6176/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(7)Section 234B

inability of authorities to frame a regular assessment after earlier assessment is set aside or nullified, tax /deposited by an assessee by way of advance tax or self-assessment tax, of tax deducted at source is liable to be refunded to assessee, since its retention by revenue would result ... facts and in the circumstances of the case the respondents were entitled to the refund of income-tax paid by them by way of advance tax and self-assessment tax in the event of assessment framed being nullified by the Tribunal on the ground of jurisdiction and there being

Raj Kishor Prasad, Nalanda vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.344/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raj Kishor Prasad………….. ………...…..…………………....Appellant Station Road, Harnaut, Nalanda, Bihar – 803110. [Pan: Bpkpp0668B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ajay Kr. Rastogi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 13, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.01.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 16 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause Therein. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That An Information Was Received From The Insight Portal Which Suggested That The Income Chargeable To Tax Has Escaped Assessment In The Case Of The Assessee For The Assessment

Section 139Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 68

provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, it is mandatory to require to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by the assessee if no return of income has been filed. Since the assessee did not able to file return of income

Mohammad Amjad Ali Sahaji, Habra, Ashokenagar vs. Ward 50(2) Kolkata, Income Tax

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

ITA 631/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

when the income of the appellant was below the taxable quantum during the period under appeal, there is no question to pay tax or advance tax. Hence, appellant filed “not applicable” in the said column of Form 35. GROUND NO 3:- That in view of the notice issued ... appeal shall not be admitted, unless the appellant has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable. Moreover, the appellant has also not made an application as per the Proviso to Section 249(4). As the applicable advance tax has not been paid

Hingora Ali Mohd Vali Mohd, Parbhani Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Office Ward Hingoli, Parbhani Maharashtra

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

ITA 2143/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2143/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Hingora Ali Mohd Vali Mohd, V The Income Tax Officer, Opp. Amol Petrol Pumb, S Ward Hingoli, Parbhani, Basmath Road, Karegaon, Maharashtra. Parbhani – 431902. Pan: Anopk6751F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal– Ar Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastava – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 For Assessment Year 2017-18; Dated 14.08.2024, Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 144 Of The Act, Dated 27.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal As Non-Admitted U/S 249(4) Of The Act.

Section 144Section 208Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 44A

facts circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact and law that the liability to pay advance tax as per section 208 arises only when the tax payable is Rs.10,000 and more. 3. In the facts circumstances of the case ... Ld.CIT(A) ought to have taken a liberal view that the appellant is not liable for payment of advance tax but for shortfall is Rs.285 and erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits. 4. In the facts circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.AO erred

Vishwanath Singh Rathode, Hoshangabad vs. Income Tax Officer-1, Itarsi

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

ITA 142/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Vishwanath Singh Rathode V. Income Tax Officer-1 Village Chapda Grahan, Income Tax Officer-1, Seonimalwa, Seonimalwa, Niyas Coloni Itarsi, Dist Madhya Pradesh-461221. Narmadapuram, Mp- 461111. Pan:Aezpr6401F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09 01 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69

there is no admitted or undisputed tax. In the case in hand the undisputed income is Nil. Therefore, there was no liability to pay advance tax as per the relevant provisions. Reliance has been placed by the assessee on the decision of coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case ... Where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax when was payable by him;” The provision of section 249 deals with form of appeal and limitation. Subsection (4) of sectior 249 deals with admission of appeal. According

Harjit Singh, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Mohali, Punjab

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

ITA 128/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं . / ITA No.128/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Harjit Singh C/o M/s VV Bhalla & Company, E-64, Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana- 141001 स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BLAPS8802E अपीलार्थी/Appellant बनाम The ITO Ward 6(1), Mohali प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/01/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT

Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

returned by him and in a case where no return has been filed, the assessee has paid the amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him. It was submitted that the requirement of the statute therefore relates to the admitted tax and not to dispute ... that the matter be remitted to the file of the ld CIT(A) who shall consider the explanation of the assessee in terms of advance tax liability u/s 249(4) and all the contentions raised before us are thus left open. Where the same is found to be in order

Priyanka Mandadi, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1184/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1184/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ms. Priyanka Mandadi Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan:Cswpm1029D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri, K.S. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri, K.S. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

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

assessee has submitted that, the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as non-admissible for want of advance tax payment u/s 249(4)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961. He has pointed out that, the assessee has not filed any return of income for the year ... learned CIT (A). The learned AR has submitted that the dismissal of the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-payment of advance tax is not sustainable, when there was no return of income filed by the assessee, nor any taxable income was earned by the assessee during

Srirampura Prathamika Krishi Pathina Sahakara Sangha Limited, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward -1, Chitradurga

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

ITA 1731/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Ramangowda S. Gowda, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for department

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

clear that appeal before the ld. CIT(A) should be admitted only when the assessee has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax, which was payable by him. Where the return of income has not been filed the proviso to said section also describe that the assessee ... exemption from this clause, if an application is made before the ld. CIT(A) for not paying an amount equal to the amount of advance tax for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing. In the instant case, as observed by the AO in para

Devidayal Aluminium Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 4610/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 221(1)

appeal that no interest under 20 | P a g e . section 234C ought to have been charged qua the first three installments of advance tax stated to be due on 15th June, 15th September and 15th December, respectively, as the project’s corresponding transfer had taken place only

Devidayal Aluminium Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 4609/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 221(1)

Gagandeep Kaur Nagi, Sonari vs. Income Tax Officer, Jamshedpur

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

ITA 45/RAN/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryassessment Year:2017-18 Gagandeep Kaur Nagi, Flat Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1). No. B, Block No. 5A, Jharkhand. Mahananda Apartment. Jharkhand. Pan/Gir No.Auupk7438C (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.R. Mittal,Ca Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T.Pandya, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Mittal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T.Pandya, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 69

Section 249 (4)(b) of the Act the assessee is mandatorily required to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him in order to get his appeal admitted. Since this compliance was not done by the assessee, the NFAC/CIT (A) dismissed the appeal ... admitted the appeal invoking Section 249(4)(b) of the Act when the truth remains that assessee is not liable to pay any advance tax since the additions itself are arbitrary and bad in law. 5. Analysing the entire ambit of the existing facts I am of the considered view

People Tree Chits Private Limited, Chamarajpet vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2270/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. R. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. V. Parithivel, JCIT

Section 115BSection 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

that at Sl. No.9 of Form 35 the assessee has offered “not applicable” comments and failed to make payment of amount equal to the advance tax which was due on its income. Further the CIT(A)/NFAC was of the view that the assessee has also not requested for exemption ... Since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid the an amount equal to the amount of advance tax, the ld. CIT(A) held that present People Tree Chits Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore Page 4 of 7 appeal is not liable to be admitted. The appeal

Arvind Shashank HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 460/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 210Section 234ASection 271(1)Section 271F

requires to be dropped. 13. 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 and 234C requires to be deleted. 14. Your appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter

Gurmukh Singh Sandhu, Vpo Manuke vs. Income Tax Officer (OSD)-2, Jagraon

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

ITA 496/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 496/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 बनाम Gurmukh Singh Sandhu, The Ito (Osd-2), Near B. D. Public School, Jagraon, Vpo Manuke, Tehsil Jagraon, Ludhiana 142034 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bqrps5927C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2025 आदेश/Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], For The Assessment Year 2011- 12. Ita No.496-Chd-2024 Gurmukh Signh Sandhu, Ludhiana 2 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 31,89,350/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Deposits In The Bank Accounts Of The Assessee. The Assessing Officer During The Assessment Proceedings Noted That The Assessee Had Deposited An Amount Of Rs. 31,89,350/- In His Bank Accounts (Rs. 25,75,000 With Bank Of Baroda & Rs. 6,14,350/- In Hdfc Bank). The Assessing Officer Treated The Aforesaid Amount As Unexplained Income Of The Assessee & Made The Impugned Addition.

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT

income which was chargeable to tax as income was much below the taxable limit and as a result, there was no liability to pay advance tax by the Assessee. That the order passed by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) was an ex-parte order as the Assessee could not appear before ... having a taxable income because of the bank deposits in his bank accounts and further observed that the Assessee had not deposited the advance tax payable by him. He, therefore, did not adjudicate the appeal on merits but dismissed the appeal of the Assessee as not admissible for non-deposit

Lanxes India P.Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 1, Thane

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1125/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta and ShriDharmeshFor Respondent: Dr.P. Daniel – Spl. Counsel

Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-9, Now Circle-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3218/AHD/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1993-94

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153Section 250

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat- III, Ahmedabad to the effect that the appellant had defrauded the Revenue as well as the government by forging advance tax challans and subsequently filing these forged challans in various Wards along with the return of income in bogus names with an intention to claim ... operandi of perpetrating fraud was discovered It was found that the appellant used to deposit nominal amounts say Rs. 11/- or Rs. 12/- as advance tax in bogus names/existing names and thereafter secured two copies of such challans. The copies of these challans which were to be attached with

Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-9, Now Circle-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3217/AHD/2015[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1992-93

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153Section 250

M/S. Datanet Ecommerce Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.O., CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2012/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 5

allotted with such PAN and GST return with April, 2022 under such PAN. However, the case of the assessee is that the advance tax for the AY 2021-22 amounting to Rs. 10,00,000/- and for AY 2022-23 amounting to Rs. 35,00,000/- were paid under first

M/S. Datanet Ecommerce Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.O., CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2011/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 5