← 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

Chodisetty Hemashankar, Tuni vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tuni

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 74/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.74/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Chodisetty Hemashankar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Akupc 0617 K Tuni. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

appeal shall not be admitted\, unless the appellant has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him if no return of income has been filed. In the present case, the appellant did not file return of income. On or before filing the present ... appeal, the appellant has failed to make the required payment of the amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him. Further, the appellant neither provided any satisfactory clarification / explanation in response to the deficiency letter issued by this office nor did he offer any reason

Apparao Mutchakarla, Vizag vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vizag

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 4/VIZ/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.04/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Apparao Mutchakarla, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Vizag. Income Tax, Pan: Ahvpm 9813 F Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

appeal shall not be admitted, unless the appellant has paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable. As the applicable advance tax has not been paid by the appellant before filing of the present appeal, the present appeal shall not be admitted. Therefore the present ... facts of the case and provisions of law. 2. The Ld. CIT dismissed the appeal as not maintainable since the assessee has not paid advance tax, which according to CIT is in violation of provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act, which finding is not correct since

Anil Mehta HUF, Partner of Erstwhile Hathibhoy and Sons (Since Dissolved), Mumbai vs. ITO-24(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3998/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

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

facts in treating the appeal as infructuous and dismissing the appeal in limine u/s. 249(4) of the Act on the ground that no advance tax is paid by the appellant. 2 The Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition in the hands ... wherein if no return has been filed by the assessee, assessee has to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him. Thus, ld. CIT (A) did not even verify the records or the submissions and without applying his mind has simply dismissed

Pingash Marketing Private Limited, Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 99/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 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

Gopesh Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 98/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 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

Vidhi Cinemas Pvt.Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 88/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 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

Zhilmil Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 87/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 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

Shanta Blankets Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 84/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 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

Gowrisankaran Ramamurthy, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp. Ward 22(6), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.147/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Gowrisankaran Ramamurthy Ito बनाम/ Vs. No.1, Arul Neri Nagar Extension, Non-Corporate Ward-22(6) Sembakkam, Chennai-600 073. Tambaram. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agcpg-1136-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Anandh (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Anandh (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

file any return of income. The Ld. CIT(A), considering the provisions of Sec.249(4)(b), observed that the assessee failed to pay advance tax which was due on its income. Accordingly, the appeal was not admitted against which the assessee is in further appeal before

The Bangalore Fruit Commission Agents Association, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions, Ward-2, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 417/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

deductions u/s 11 & 12 of the Act. The assessee also challenged the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act for not paying the advance tax and the interest u/s 234C of the Act for the deferment of advance tax. 2.1. The appellate authority, NFAC in respect of deductions disallowed

M/S. Nine Globe Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-7(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3889/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran: A.Y : 2012-13 M/S. Nine Globe Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 402A, Prathamesh Tower, Tax, Circle-7(2)(2), Mumbai. 11-12, S.B. Marg, (Respondent) Lower Parel, Mumbai. Pan : Aaccn8403F (Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms. Aishwarya VanikarFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu
Section 144Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)Section 69C

asked vide DIN & letter no. ITBA/NFAC/F/17/2023-24/1054461517(1) dated 19.07.2023 to intimate whether it has made payment of tax – which includes element of advance tax also-in compliance to notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act but the appellant made no compliance to this letter.” 4. In that view ... dismissed on the ground that the appellant has not filed RoI as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax, which was payable by it. It can thus be seen that the CIT(A) had no occasion to examine the merits of the impugned additions

Rajlaxmi Satishkumar Sharma, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 121/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

basis of technical issue only stating that "Neither return of income has been filed nor an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per section 249(4)(b) of the income tax, 1961 has been paid particulars of payment mentioned. In fact the assessee is having income below ... income below the exemption limits and not liable to file the Return of Income as well as not liable to pay the taxes / advance tax and hence, there were good and sufficient reasons for such contravention. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have exercised his discretion in favour

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Vizag Seaport Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Apr 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Fenil A Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

case (1982) 134 ITR 219 the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the over draft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that the taxes

M/S. Tega Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 539/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234CSection 80JSection 91

grounds of appeal on this issue) 7. Arbitrary addition of income (Refer our detailed grounds of appeal on this issue) 8. Short grant of Advance Tax Credit (Refer our detailed grounds of appeal on this issue) 9. Short grant of TDS Credit (Refer our detailed grounds of appeal on this ... Accordingly, the same are dismissed as not pressed. Ground No. 1 is general in nature. 4. Ground No. 8 relates to short grant of advance tax credit and the only prayer is to restore the matter back to the ld. AO for necessary verification. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee

Neha Meena, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

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

ITA 49/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sandep Gosain & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Monisha Chaudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 249(4)(b)Section 69

learned counsel argued that where the assessee was not having taxable income, the provisions of income tax do not stipulate that how the advance tax liability has to be worked out. The AR contended that since, appellant has no taxable income during the assessment year under consideration and hence ... advance tax liability payable and accordingly, the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the act not applicable in the present case of the assessee. 3. On the merits of the case, the AR submitted that during the financial year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the mother

Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Arshiya Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 971/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ajay ChandraFor Respondent: Piyush Chhajed
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Woolcombers of India Ltd's case (supra) the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the overdraft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that ... case (1982) 134 ITR 219 the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the over draft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that the taxes

M/S Arshiya Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA No

ITA 7900/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhacit, Cc-6(4) Vs. M/S Arshiya Ltd. R. No. 32(1), 308, Level 3, Ceejay Ground Floor, Aayakar House, F Block Shiv Bhavan, M.K. Road, Sagar Estate, Dr. A.B. Mumbai -400 020 Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400018 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaaci2679A Appellant .. Respondent Dcit, Cc-6(4) Vs. M/S Arshiya Ltd. R. No. 1925, 19Th Floor, 308, Level 3, Ceejay Air India Building, House, F Block Shiv Nariman Point, Sagar Estate, Dr. A.B. Mumbai -400 021 Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaaci2679A Appellant .. Respondent M/S Arshiya Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc-6(4) 308, Level 3, Ceejay R. No. 1925, 19Th Floor, House, F Block Shiv Sagar Air India Building, Estate, Dr. A.B. Road, Nariman Point, Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Mumbai -400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaaci2679A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ajay ChandraFor Respondent: Piyush Chhajed
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Woolcombers of India Ltd's case (supra) the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the overdraft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that ... case (1982) 134 ITR 219 the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the over draft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that the taxes

ACIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Arshiya Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA No

ITA 3952/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey&

For Respondent: Piyush Chhajed
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Woolcombers of India Ltd's case (supra) the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the overdraft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that ... case (1982) 134 ITR 219 the Calcutta High Court had come to the conclusion that the profits were sufficient to meet the advance tax liability and the profits were deposited in the over draft account of the assessee and in such a case it should be presumed that the taxes

DCIT, Circle-43, Kolkata vs. Vijay Saree House, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 903/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 133ASection 143(2)

questions put to the partner of the firm, Sri Gouri Shankar Goenka during the survey operation and he has agreed to pay advance tax to the tune of Rs. 1.05 crores for the assessment year under consideration. However, during the assessment proceeding, the ld. AO found that assessee has claimed ... refund of Rs. 83,87,720/- out of advance tax deposited by the assessee. On this issue assessee’s contention was that the opening stock of Rs. 3,20,45,110/- was not taken into consideration while calculating closing stock at the time of survey. However

Ge Healthcare Finland Oy(Formerly Known As Instrumentarium Corporation Ltd, Bangalore vs. Dy. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation -1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the two appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 311/KOL/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 9Section 92Section 92C

assessee has contested charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act on the ground that it was not liable to pay advance tax. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income Tax vs. Mitsubishi Corporation reported