← 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

Mr. Ravindra Karadahalli Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 635/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Abhishek Murthy R., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

proviso under said section. According to the NFAC, he dismissed the appeal as the assessee has not made payment of amount equal to the advance tax, which was due on its income. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused ... above orders of the coordinate bench, the ld. NFAC ought not to have dismissed the appeal holding that assessee has not paid the advance tax due on its income as there was no liability of payment of advance tax as the assessee has disputed the entire addition made

Mr. Ravindra Karadahalli Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1129/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Abhishek Murthy R., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

proviso under said section. According to the NFAC, he dismissed the appeal as the assessee has not made payment of amount equal to the advance tax, which was due on its income. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused ... above orders of the coordinate bench, the ld. NFAC ought not to have dismissed the appeal holding that assessee has not paid the advance tax due on its income as there was no liability of payment of advance tax as the assessee has disputed the entire addition made

Mr. Ravindra Karadahalli Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1128/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Abhishek Murthy R., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(b)

proviso under said section. According to the NFAC, he dismissed the appeal as the assessee has not made payment of amount equal to the advance tax, which was due on its income. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused ... above orders of the coordinate bench, the ld. NFAC ought not to have dismissed the appeal holding that assessee has not paid the advance tax due on its income as there was no liability of payment of advance tax as the assessee has disputed the entire addition made

Shish Pali, Noida vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Noida

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3400/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

parte. While doing so, learned first appellate authority observed that the assessee has failed to pay the amount equal to the amount of advance tax, which she was required to pay, in terms of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Alleging non- compliance with the provisions of section

Shish Pali, Noida vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Noida

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3399/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

parte. While doing so, learned first appellate authority observed that the assessee has failed to pay the amount equal to the amount of advance tax, which she was required to pay, in terms of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Alleging non- compliance with the provisions of section

Ranjitsingh Premsingh Rawal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1482/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ramchandran, A/RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D/R
Section 249(4)(b)Section 68Section 69A

ground that the appellant has not filed the return of income and, further, the appellant has also not paid the amount equal to advance tax as required under Section 249(4)(b). 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) ought ... basis of self-assessment of tax liability during the course of the assessment proceeding and it was more than the amount equal to the advance tax payable by the appellant. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) Ought to have deleted

Marsh India Insurance Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-7(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5766/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Section 234B

services rendered to the appellant company by its associated enterprises, short grant of credit for tax deducted at source, short grant of credit for advance tax paid and non- 2 M/s. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. grant of credit for self-assessment tax paid and consequential wrong levy

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Syed Irfanuddin, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 442/HYD/2022[2018-9]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132(4)

various evidences filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as before the DDIT(Inv.). Further, the assessee has paid advance tax thereon prior to the date of search. Therefore, under these circumstances, once the assessee has proved the initial ITA No 357 of 2022 Mohd ... source of expenditure is not disclosed. However, in the instant case, the assessee has disclosed the income after considering the expenditure and had paid advance tax thereon prior to the search. No new fact has surfaced during the course of search since the assessee has paid advance tax on such

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Syed Imranuddin, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 437/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132(4)

various evidences filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as before the DDIT(Inv.). Further, the assessee has paid advance tax thereon prior to the date of search. Therefore, under these circumstances, once the assessee has proved the initial ITA No 357 of 2022 Mohd ... source of expenditure is not disclosed. However, in the instant case, the assessee has disclosed the income after considering the expenditure and had paid advance tax thereon prior to the search. No new fact has surfaced during the course of search since the assessee has paid advance tax on such

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Syed Imranuddin, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 436/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132(4)

various evidences filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as before the DDIT(Inv.). Further, the assessee has paid advance tax thereon prior to the date of search. Therefore, under these circumstances, once the assessee has proved the initial ITA No 357 of 2022 Mohd ... source of expenditure is not disclosed. However, in the instant case, the assessee has disclosed the income after considering the expenditure and had paid advance tax thereon prior to the search. No new fact has surfaced during the course of search since the assessee has paid advance tax on such

ACIT Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Syed Zeeshanuddin, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 432/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132(4)

various evidences filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as before the DDIT(Inv.). Further, the assessee has paid advance tax thereon prior to the date of search. Therefore, under these circumstances, once the assessee has proved the initial ITA No 357 of 2022 Mohd ... source of expenditure is not disclosed. However, in the instant case, the assessee has disclosed the income after considering the expenditure and had paid advance tax thereon prior to the search. No new fact has surfaced during the course of search since the assessee has paid advance tax on such

Darpan Kanubhai Shah, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(4), Vadodara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 123/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 123/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2018-19 बनाम बनाम बनाम बनाम Darpan Kanubhai Shah The Income-Tax Officer, C/O. Darpan Travels, Vs. Ward-3(1)(4), Near Ramji Mandir, Vadodara Madanzampa Road, Vadodara-390001 Pan : Agips 3405 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Samir Parikh, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 22.11.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “(1) The Learned Cit(Appeal) Is Not Correct In Holding That The Assessee Has Not Filed Return Of Income U/S 148. Consequently The Learned Cit (Appeal) Is Not Correct That The Appeal Is Not Liable To Be Admitted. (Ii) Alternatively Appeal Is Allowed By Set Aside The Order & Matter Referred Back To The Desk Of Hon. Cit For Reconsideration. Darpan Kanubhai Shah Vs. Ito Ay : 2018-19 2

For Appellant: Shri Samir Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 54B

when no return of income has been filed by the assessee, the assessee ought to have paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him. Finding the assessee to have not filed any return of income and to have not complied with the conditions ... specified Darpan Kanubhai Shah Vs. ITO AY : 2018-19 3 u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act of having paid advance tax on his income, he dismissed the assessee’s appeal as being infructuous and non-maintainable. 5. Aggrieved by this order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee

Deepak Khandelwal, Sehore vs. ITO, Sehore

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

ITA 120/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanideepak Khandelwal Ito J.P. Market, Narsullaganj Sehore Vs. Sehore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Agxpk7517R Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 05.07.2024

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 294(4)(b)

assesse has submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse in limine as not admissible for want of payment of advance tax as per provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. The assessee did not file any return of income ... income due to non-taxable income during the year under Page 2 of 9 ITANo.120/Ind/2024 Deepak Khandelwal consideration then the question of payment of advance tax does not arise. 3. On the other hand, Ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have considered

Aishani Consultants Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 2(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3911/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Smt Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

holding that the assessee had not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by it. 8. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld counsel of the assessee reiterated what has been stated before ... assessee submitted that the there was a refund claim in the return of income filed, hence was no question of payment of advance tax. 9. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused

Jotindra Steel and Tubes Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3805/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 156

Tax payable on such income was computed to be Rs.87,70,730/- . However, the assessee had paid an advance tax amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/- and tax was also deducted at source of Rs.90,04,694/-. Thus, a total tax amounting to Rs. 1,05,04,694/- was accordingly ... income for the impugned A.Y on 31.10.2019 declaring total income at Rs.1,57,94,132/- and paid tax of Rs.53,85,276/- consisting of advance tax of Rs.30,00,000/- and tax deducted at source of Rs.25,05,786/- and claimed a refund of Rs.1,20,510/-. The CPC Bengaluru

Jotindra Steel and Tubes Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3804/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 156

Tax payable on such income was computed to be Rs.87,70,730/- . However, the assessee had paid an advance tax amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/- and tax was also deducted at source of Rs.90,04,694/-. Thus, a total tax amounting to Rs. 1,05,04,694/- was accordingly ... income for the impugned A.Y on 31.10.2019 declaring total income at Rs.1,57,94,132/- and paid tax of Rs.53,85,276/- consisting of advance tax of Rs.30,00,000/- and tax deducted at source of Rs.25,05,786/- and claimed a refund of Rs.1,20,510/-. The CPC Bengaluru

Jotindra Steel and Tubes Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, New Delhi

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3803/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 156

Tax payable on such income was computed to be Rs.87,70,730/- . However, the assessee had paid an advance tax amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/- and tax was also deducted at source of Rs.90,04,694/-. Thus, a total tax amounting to Rs. 1,05,04,694/- was accordingly ... income for the impugned A.Y on 31.10.2019 declaring total income at Rs.1,57,94,132/- and paid tax of Rs.53,85,276/- consisting of advance tax of Rs.30,00,000/- and tax deducted at source of Rs.25,05,786/- and claimed a refund of Rs.1,20,510/-. The CPC Bengaluru

Enn Vee Holdings Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1195/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

book value of the assets in the balance-sheet as reduced by any am of paid as deduction or collection at source or as advance tax payment as reduced by the amount of tax claimed as refund under the become-tax Act and shown in the balance- sheet as asset ... 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

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1839/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

book value of the assets in the balance-sheet as reduced by any am of paid as deduction or collection at source or as advance tax payment as reduced by the amount of tax claimed as refund under the become-tax Act and shown in the balance- sheet as asset ... 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

Shiva Pharmachem Limited, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 698/AHD/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2021-22 Shiva Pharmachem Limited The Dy.Cit Shiva 12Th Floor, Vs Circle-2(1)91) Opp. Tricolour Hospital Vadodara Genda Circle, Vadodara-390 023 (Gujarat) Pan: Aajcs 3940 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre – Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”] Passed On 24/07/2023 U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Instituted Against The Order Dated 19/12/2022 Passed By The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22. Facts Of The Case: Shiva Pharmachem Liimited Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year 2021-22:

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 230Section 250

contention of the assesse that when the amalgamated results or income of the amalgamating company has been taken into consideration, then the credit for advance tax paid and TDS made by amalgamating company should be given to amalgamated company i.e. assesse before us." Therefore, the Ld. CPC, Income Tax Department