Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal rules interest on advance tax based on cheque presentation date, not clearance date.</h1> <h3>The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU Versus Toyoto Boshoku Automotive (I) P. Ltd.</h3> The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU Versus Toyoto Boshoku Automotive (I) P. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:- Interpretation of Section 234C regarding the calculation of interest on advance tax payments.- Applicability of Central Government Treasury rules and Central Government Account (Receipts and Payments) rules, 1983.- Validity of relying on CBDT Circular when rules were not operative.- Comparison with a previous judgment by the Chennai Bench of ITAT.- Date of payment for advance tax based on cheque clearance date or deposit date.Interpretation of Section 234C:The appeal involved a dispute over the interpretation of Section 234C regarding the calculation of interest on advance tax payments. The Revenue contended that interest should be calculated based on the date of cheque clearance, while the assessee argued that it should be based on the date of cheque deposit. The CIT (A) relied on a CB~T Circular and a Supreme Court decision to support the assessee's position, stating that if a cheque is honored on presentation, the date of payment relates back to the date of cheque presentation. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision based on various decisions of the jurisdictional High Court and the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal, which established that the date of presentation of the cheque should be considered the date of payment for calculating interest under Section 234C.Applicability of Government Treasury Rules:The Revenue raised a concern regarding the applicability of the Central Government Treasury rules and the Central Government Account (Receipts and Payments) rules, 1983. They argued that the CIT (A) erred in relying on a judgment related to the period when the Treasury rules were in operation, which were later replaced by the 1983 rules. However, the Tribunal found that the CB~T Circular clarifying the date of payment concerning honored cheques was still valid, and the Supreme Court and High Court decisions supported the interpretation that the date of presentation should be considered the date of payment.Validity of CBDT Circular and Previous Judgments:The Revenue further contested the reliance on a CBDT Circular issued when the Central Government Account (Receipts & Payments) Rules, 1983 were not operative. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision based on the continued validity of the CB~T Circular and established legal precedents supporting the interpretation that the date of presentation of the cheque determines the date of payment for advance tax calculations under Section 234C.Comparison with Previous Judgment:The Revenue highlighted a judgment by the Chennai Bench of ITAT in a different case, where a decision favored the department on a similar issue. Despite this, the Tribunal in the current case relied on the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court and the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal, which consistently supported the interpretation that the date of presentation of the cheque should be considered the date of payment for calculating interest under Section 234C.Date of Payment for Advance Tax:The central issue revolved around determining the date of payment for advance tax, specifically whether it should be based on the cheque clearance date or the cheque deposit date. The Tribunal, in alignment with previous legal precedents and decisions, concluded that the date of presentation of the cheque should be the determining factor for calculating interest under Section 234C. As the cheques in question were presented and deposited within the due date, and subsequently encashed without being returned unpaid, the Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.---

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found