Which cases are most cited on Section 207?

DIT v. Jacabs Civil Incorporated/ Mitsubhishi Corporation (330 ITR 578) — 115 citing judgments; CIT v. Tide Water Marine International Inc. (309 ITR 85) — 12 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 207?

BharatTax indexes 50 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 207 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 207 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.403

Section 207 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 403 (Liability for payment of advance tax) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 403 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 207 is DIT v. Jacabs Civil Incorporated/ Mitsubhishi Corporation (330 ITR 578), cited in 115 of the 50 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 207

DIT v. Jacabs Civil Incorporated/ Mitsubhishi Corporation

330 ITR 578 · 2011 · High Court

115

citing judgments

Interest under Section 234B is generally not leviable on non-residents whose income is subject to tax deduction at source under Section 195, provided the non-resident assessee did not induce short or non-deduction of TDS by the payer.

CIT v. Tide Water Marine International Inc.

309 ITR 85 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

Interest under Section 234B is not leviable when the entire income of the assessee was deductible at source under Section 195. Provisions for advance tax under Sections 234B and 234C are not applicable if tax is deductible at source under Section 195.

Judgments on Section 207

Chetan Shivaji Shinde, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 9227/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 192Section 250

Rajendra Prasad, Palamau, Satbarwa vs. ITO, Daltonganj

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

ITA 26/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2018-19 Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Rajendra Prasad, Satbarwa Vs. Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ito, Ward 3(5), Daltonganj Ramghat, Ramghat, Palamau, Palamau, Satbarwa-822126 822126 Pan/Gir No. . (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr : Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017 9.1.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A) Nfac/2017- 18/10212042 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Rajat Essee. Shri Rajat Datta, Ld Cit Dr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, ld CIT DR

Section 207Section 208Section 210Section 249(4)(b)

Jacob Thomas, Kozhencherry vs. ACIT, Thiruvalla Range, Thiruvalla

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 132/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jacob Thomas .......... Appellant 1, Mulamoottil, Kozhencherry 689641 [Pan: Ackpt3269L] Vs. Acit, Ward-1 & Tps, Thiruvalla .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Rajakannan, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.05.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)], Dated 27.12.2023 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual. The Return Of Income For Ay 2016-17 Was Filed On 17.10.2016 Declaring Income Of Rs. 37,97,390/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Acit, Ward -1, Thriuvalla (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 21.12.2018

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 207Section 207(2)Section 234BSection 234ESection 243BSection 37Section 37(1)

Senniappan Mani, Tirupur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3230/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3230/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) Senniappan Mani, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.7, Sivasakthi Nagar, Ward 2(1) 1St Street, K T C Main Road, Tirupur. Parappalayam, Tirupur 641 604. [Pan: Bbnpm 7005C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Senthil Kumar, Advocate Virtual, Erode ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri () This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 01.02.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 232 Days In Filing The Appeal. Considering The Period Of Delay & Reasons Stated In Condonation Affidavit Given By The Assessee, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment Was Completed U/S 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Act Wherein Ao Had Made Addition Of Rs.1,00,98,950/- U/S 69 On Account Of Unexplained Investment & Rs.1,11,66,838/- U/S 69A On Account Of Unexplained Money. Assessee Further Challenged The Order Of Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Act Before The Ld.Cit(A) Who Did Not Admit The Appeal Of The Assessee For The Reason That The Assessee Has Not Paid An Amount Equal To The Amount Of Advance Tax Which Was Payable In The Light Of The Mandatory Provision Of Section 249(4)(B) Of The Act. The Assessee Is Now In Appeal Before The Tribunal With The Following Grounds:-

For Appellant: Shri. Senthil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT

Section 147Section 207Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69Section 69A

Ramakrishnaiah Gowaramma, Tumkur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tumakuru

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

ITA 1936/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri V Parithivel, JCIT (DR)

Section 148Section 207Section 249

Ganesh Chhaganlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC Bengaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Preetam Kumar H. Turerao, SR. DR

Section 143(1)Section 207Section 207(2)(a)Section 234CSection 4

Dr Nirmalkumar Phadkule Pratishthan, Solapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Solapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1321/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1321/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dr.Nirmalkumar Phadkule The Income Tax Pratishthan, V Officer, Solapur. S No.6039, Dr.Nirmalkumar S Phadkule Sabhagruh, Sidheshwar Peth, Near Sidheshwar Temple, Solapur – 413001. Pan: Aabtd2883M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2024 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(Appeal)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2015-16 Dated 31.10.2023. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : Dr.Nirmalkumar Phadkule Pratishthan [A]

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 148Section 156Section 207Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)Section 27l

Vikram Singh, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO Ward - 2(5), Noida

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6559/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon‟Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmavikram Singh, Vs. Ito, C/O. Chaman Singh, B-6 Ward-2(5), (Basement) Js Arcade, Near Noida Bikanerwala, Opp. Metro Pillar No. 65, Sector-18, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jmlps3035M

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mrinal Kumar Dass, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 207Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

Sudhir Vishwanath Shinde, Dhule vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Dhule

In the result, assessee‟s appeal is allowed

ITA 497/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 142(1)Section 207Section 207(2)Section 234B

Pankaj Rastogi, Jaipur vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Jaipur

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

ITA 4/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jul 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Manik (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 143(1)Section 192Section 199Section 205

Shri Jayantilal Dhanjibhai Ray, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, we hold that ld

ITA 1329/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Sharma, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 207Section 234BSection 250(4)

Neeta Rohit Patel, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 7817/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleneeta Rohit Patel, Vs. Dcit (Cpc) 2Nd Floor, Rohit Post Bag No. 2, Chambers Janmaboomi Electronic City Post, Mark, Fort, Mumbai – Bangalore - 5601000 400001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahpp6550D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Chandra Vijay, Dr Date Of Hearing 14.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 16.06.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-58, Mumbai, Passed U/S. 143(1) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal;

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay, DR

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 207Section 208Section 234B