Section 210 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.406, 407

Section 210 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 406 (Payment of advance tax by assessee on his own accord) and section 407 (Payment of advance tax by assessee in pursuance of order of Assessing Officer) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 406 of the 2025 ActRead section 407 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 210 is DIT v. Jacabs Civil Incorporated/ Mitsubhishi Corporation (330 ITR 578), cited in 115 of the 88 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 210

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. Kotak Mahendra Finance Ltd.
265 ITR 119 · 2004 · High Court
59
citing judgments

Interest levied under Sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income-tax Act is compensatory in nature, not penal. This interest is automatically imposed upon default in payment of advance tax.

CIT v. Sukhini P. Modi
367 ITR 682 · 2014 · High Court
21
citing judgments

A notice issued under Section 143(2) is a jurisdictional notice, and the absence of such a notice renders the assessment order invalid. Failure to issue a valid notice under Section 143(2) cannot be cured by subsequent actions or findings.

CIT v. Tide Water Marine International Inc.
309 ITR 85 · 2009 · High Court
12
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.

CLSA India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
149 Taxmann.com 380 · 2023 · High Court
10
citing judgments

An active Permanent Account Number (PAN) for a non-existent entity, post-amalgamation, does not justify reassessment proceedings against that entity. The revenue cannot rely on an active PAN to dilute established legal principles regarding the assessment of merged entities.

Prime Securities Ltd. v. ACIT
333 ITR 464 · 2011 · High Court
8
citing judgments
139 (Madras), CIT, Meerut v. Prem Kumar
169 Taxmann 351 · 2008 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Prime Securities Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation)
20 Taxmann.com 757 · 2012 · High Court
5
citing judgments
Taxman 574 (Delhi), City Union Bank Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
116 Taxmann.com 139 · 2020 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Escorts Ltd. v. CIT
127 Taxmann 574 · 2003 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 210