“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

Mohinder Chauhan, Shimla vs. ITO, W-1, Shimla

ITA 810/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: This Tribunal As & By Way Of Second Appeal Under The Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is Assessment Year 2010-11. The Corresponding Previous Year Period Is From 01.04.2009 To 31.03.2010. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Order Bearing No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057469665(1) Dated 28.10.2023

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl.CIT Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253

stated as under : “Where no return has been filed by the appellant for the assessment year, whether an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per Section 249(4)(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been paid. NOT APPLICABLE”|. 17. That since the aforesaid case ... filing an Income Tax Return (ITR) it was incumbent upon the assessee to have paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per Section 249(4)(b) of the Act which in fact was not paid and instead ‘non applicable’ was stated in Form No.35

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT(OSD) Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1621/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

attention that Article 23(2) and 23(3) does not mandate such proportionality. Tax paid abroad has to be given the same treatment as advance tax paid or TDS and cannot be given a different treatment. In any event, the domestic law with regard to FTC against MAT as enshrined

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1517/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

Chandra Financial Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4697/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Us, Ld. Counsel Submitted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Not Admitting The Appeal By Invoking The Provision Of Section 249(4) On The Ground That Assessee Has Not Made Payment For Advancement Of Tax. He Pointed Out That Assessee

Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)

exparte due to non-service of notice. Thus, when assessee has not filed the return of income, there is no question of paying any advance tax. The claim of the assessee is that it has no income, therefore, there is no question of any payment of advance tax. 3. Since

M/S Gymkhana Club, Panchkula vs. ITO, W-3, Panchkula

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1305/CHANDI/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D.Jain, Vice Prersident & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 1305/Chd/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Gymkhana Club, Vs The Ito, Sector 6, Ward-3, Panchkula. Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaag0115B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By: Shri S.K.Mukhi, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2024 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/10/2024 Physical Hearing आदेश/Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav,A.M.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Mukhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 234B

reason for the assessee to have included the interest income in the computation of taxable income for the purposes of payment of advance tax. He nce, under a bonafide belief and as a prudent assessee and also on the advice of its Income Tax Consultants and Auditors, the assessee ... advance tax which has ultimately resulted in levy of the impugned interest under Section 234B of the Act, which therefore, deserve to be deleted. It was further submitted that it is only in pursuance of the order of the ITAT for the impugned assessment year, the AO has issued notice

Orient Overseas Container Line Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-Circle 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.3 is allowed

ITA 3278/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Us The Effective Ground Which Has Been Raised Is Ground No.3, Wherein Assessee Has Challenged That Gst Amount Cannot Be Considered For The Purpose Of Computing Presumptive Income U/S.44B Of The Act. For The Sake Of Ready Reference, The

Section 143(3)Section 44B

book profit computed by the Id. AO is deleted. 33. With regard to short grant of tax deducted at source and credit of advance tax as raised by ground No.5 & 6, it has been stated that assessee has filed rectification application before the ld. AO which has not been disposed

Kiri Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 422/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 201Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)

observe that even in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd, the issue involved is relating to interest paid on late payment of advance-tax. Therefore, the issue involved in the present case is not relating to late remittance of advance-tax but late remittance of TDS. Therefore, the issue ... supra). The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under :— FACTS During the year under consideration, the assessee failed to pay advance tax equivalent to 75 per cent of estimated tax. The Assessing Officer levied\section 215 as well as under section 139. The assessee claimed that were payable were

Shri Nagin A Vaghela, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

ITA 270/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. Nos.449/Ahd/2019 & 44/Ahd/2020 (A.Ys.: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Nagin A. Vaghela, Tax, 11, Purva Bunglow, Nr. Central Circle-3, Manglam Duple, Sama, Vadodara Vadodara [Pan No.Aakpw5302R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 158B

appeal: 14. “1. The Ld. CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad has dismissed the appeal filed against the order dated 19.01.2016 for want of payment of advance tax by invoking the provisions of Sec. 249(4)(b) of the I.T. Act. The appeal may please be restored to the file ... required u/s. 249(4)(b). 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad may please be directed to hold that the non- payment of advance tax is a curable defect for the admission and adjudication of appeal and on the defect being cured, the appeal ought to be restored

Shri Nagin A Vaghela, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

ITA 1562/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 158B

DCIT., (Internation Taxation)-2, Hyderabad vs. Virtusa International B V, Netherland

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

ITA 727/HYD/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Nidhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234C

without appreciating the fact that the interest u/s.234B is governed by the provisions of Sec.234B which speaks about charging of interest u/s.234B when the advance tax paid by the assessee is less than 90% of the assessed tax. (v) The CIT(Appeals) erred in law in holding that the assessee ... demand was raised due to charging of interest u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act due to non payment of advance tax. 4. Aggrieved with the order of CPC, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that

Cheeranchira Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Kottayam vs. ITO, Ward 1& Tps, Thiruvalla

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 127/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhcheeranchira Scb Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, Cheeranchira P.O. Kottayam District, Ward-1 & Tps, Vs. Kerala – 686 106. Thiruvalla. [Pan: Aaaac2102J] Kerala. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt. Swathy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 249(4)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

outset that although the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has rejected the assessee’s lower appeal in limine, on account of non-payment of advance tax 2 u/sec.249(4)(a) of the Act, we do not see purpose of remanding the matter back once it emerges during the course of hearing

Arpit Sen, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 29, Kolkata

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

ITA 1331/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: the completion of the Ld. AO as well as by the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC, despite backed by all corroborative and supported evidences, is unlawful, unwarranted and against natural justice. Your appellant prays that such an unwarranted refusal of tax credit may please be directed to be deleted. [Relief claimed Allowance of Credit of Taxes paid amounting to Rs.21,88,820.24/-].

Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 69C

Rs.2,35,44,107/- made u/s 69C). 3. That the denial of credit of Taxes paid by your appellant in the form of Advance Tax, TDS Certificates and Self- Assessment Tax made on or before the completion of the Ld. AO as well as by the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC ... accordance with law. Additionally, the assessee argued that the Ld. AO had denied the correct tax paid by the assessee in the form of advance tax, TDS certificates, and self-assessment tax which amounting to Rs. 21,88,820.24/-, despite the assessee provided supporting documents. 8. We after considering

Asianet Star Communications Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Non Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai

ITA 934/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Porus F Kaka, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CIT

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

return of income for the relevant assessment year 2018-19 from 01.10.2017 in its return of income and also claimed credit of proportionate advance tax and taxes deducted at source by Asianet Communications Pvt. Ltd., for the reason that the assessee has offered the profit before tax in the ratio

Jaikaran Nagar, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1457/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi18 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 144Section 144oSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

taxable, therefore, the Assessee has not filed ITR for the year under consideration and the Assessee is not liable to pay any advance tax in terms of proviso to Section 249 (4) of the Act, therefore submitted the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in dismissing the Appeal is not without ... agriculturist and the income of the Assessee is not taxable, therefore, contended that the Assessee is not required to pay the amount advance tax 5 Jaikaran Nagar Vs. ITO u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act. The similar issue came for consideration by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal

Pme Power Solutions India Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

crores for the financial year 2012-13 (assessment year 2013-14) and as per self assessment assessed tax as 49 crores and paid advance tax of Rs. 9 crores. Out of this, when the income of Rs. 107 crores was calculated, the petitioner also included Rs. 495 Crores which

Pme Power Solutions India Ltd, New Delhi vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 242/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

Jaladi Geetha Padmaja, Nellore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nellore

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

ITA 910/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Jaladi Geetha Padmaja, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Nellore. Ward – 1, Nellore. Pan : Acdpj9507E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri U Mini Chandran, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri U Mini Chandran, Sr.AR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271ASection 69A

seeking exemption from the operation of Sec.249(4)(b) whereas there is no liability on the part of the appellant for paying any Advance Tax. 8. The CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing the Misc. Petition without considering the application for exemption of payment of Advance Tax as per proviso ... Rs.60,582/- as income from other sources and computed the total tax payable at Rs.11,23,840/-, which includes the advance tax payable by the appellant as well as the interest on account of delayed payment of advance tax. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) observed that appellant has filed column

Kaneiyalal Ramjibhai & Sons, Bhavnagar vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 293/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri ParimalsinhFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 263

assessee submitted that tax on the disclosed amount of Rs. 4,29,81,943/- related to the excess stock had already been paid as advance tax for the assessment year, with copies of all relevant challans and documentation included in the submission. Finally, the A.O. framed the assessment on December

Maroofali I Shaikh, Bagalkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Bagalkot

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

ITA 981/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69A

assessee had neither complied nor furnished any documentary evidence showing that the assessee has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him as required u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act. The assessee has also not made any application as per the proviso ... demand is at Rs.1,40,27,642/- and as Maroofali I Shaikh, Bagalkot Page 12 of 17 per the provisions of the Act, the advance tax payable is 90% of the disputed demand amount i.e. Rs.1,26,24,879/- and the assessee has made payment of Rs.64,460/- only

ACIT 32 1, Bkc Mumbai vs. Amal Corporation, Vile Parle E Mumbai

In the result, order of the CIT(A) is confirmed and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 674/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

assets in the balance sheet comprise of Loan & advances, debtors and investments. These assets almost match the figures of their business creditors. c) The advance tax payment is very nominal despite their turn over running in to several crores. d) The entire TDS deducted (by the assessee) on the interest