GOVINDASWAMY KANNAPPAN,UPPILIPALAYAM vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CRICLE 1, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a senior citizen without business income, was not liable for advance tax under Section 207(2) of the Act. Consequently, interest levied under Sections 234B and 234C was deleted. Interest under Section 234A was also deleted as the return was filed within the time prescribed in the notice, and Section 234D interest was consequential.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an individual and senior citizen, filed a return of income for AY 2014-15. The Assessing Officer (AO) later levied interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D via a rectification order. The assessee appealed this, arguing they were exempt from advance tax and thus interest under sections 234B and 234C.
What were the issues?
Whether interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D is leviable on a senior citizen individual not having business income, and whether interest under section 234A is leviable when the return is filed within the time stipulated in a Section 148 notice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 207(2),Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 234D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, ‘ए’ �यायपीठ, चे�नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी जॉज� जॉज� के, उपा�य� एवं �ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:636/CHNY/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Govindaswamy The ACIT, Kannappan, Vs. Corporate Circle 1, 126, K.G. House, Coimbatore Arts College Road, Upplilipalayam – 641 018. PAN: AFIPK 4559D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Balachandar, JCIT सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06.05.2026 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 12.05.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A), Panaji, dated 16.01.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2014-15.
ITA No.636/CHNY/2026 :- 2 -: 2. The solitary issue raised is whether the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is justified in confirming the interest levied u/s.234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act.
Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is an individual. For the assessment year 2014-15, return of income was filed on 23.07.2014 declaring total income of Rs.93,54,120/-. Assessment was reopened by issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 29.03.2021. The reassessment was completed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 30.03.2022. In the said reassessment order, the AO did not levy any interest u/s.234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. The AO vide order dated 29.05.2023 passed u/s.154 r.w.s.147 of the Act, levied interest u/s.234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act as follows:- i. Interest u/s.234A of the Act – Rs.24,719/- ii. Interest u/s.234B of the Act – Rs.18,38,245/- iii. Interest u/s.234C of the Act – Rs.8,174/- iv. Interest u/s.234D of the Act – Rs.1,00,528/-
Aggrieved by the rectification order dated 29.05.2023, assessee filed appeal before the FAA. Before the FAA, it was contended that the AO had committed an apparent mistake in the rectification order by treating the assessee as a company, whereas the assessee is an
ITA No.636/CHNY/2026 :- 3 -: individual. It was further submitted that assessee is a senior citizen and is not having any business income. Therefore, it is submitted that assessee is not liable for any interest u/s. 234B & 234C of the Act. In this context, assessee relied on provisions of section 207(2) of the Act. As regards the interest levied u/s.234A of the Act is concerned, the Ld.AR submitted that since assessee has filed his return within the date mentioned in the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, the assessee was not liable for interest of Rs.24,719/- u/s.234A of the Act. As regards interest u/s.234D of the Act is concerned, it was submitted that it was only consequential.
The FAA rejected the submissions of the assessee. It was held by the FAA that provisions of section 207(2) of the Act will be applicable only to the individuals and not companies. It is further held that by FAA that assessee was having tax liability exceeding Rs.10,000/- and failure to pay advance tax automatically attracts interest u/s.234B and 234C of the Act. The FAA relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala reported in 252 ITR 1 and CIT vs. Rolta India Ltd., reported in 330 ITR 470 (SC) for the proposition that levy of interest u/s.234A, 234B and 234C is mandatory and automatic.
ITA No.636/CHNY/2026 :- 4 -: 6. Aggrieved, assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a paper-book enclosing therein the return of income filed for the relevant assessment year, the notices and reply submitted during the course of proceedings before the AO and the FAA, etc. The Ld.AR reiterated the submissions made before the Income-tax authorities.
The Ld.DR was duly heard.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The solitary issue for consideration is whether the assessee is liable for interest u/s.234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. As regards interest u/s.234B & 234C of the Act is concerned, we notice that assessee is an individual and is a senior citizen. Copy of aadhaar card of the assessee is placed on record at page 84 of the paper-book filed by the assessee. Section 207(2) of the Act states that an individual resident assessee above age of sixty years and not having income chargeable to tax under the head ‘business or profession’ is not liable for payment of advance tax. Section 207(2) of the Act reads as follows:- 207. Liability for payment of advance tax.— ………. (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to an individual resident in India, who—
ITA No.636/CHNY/2026 :- 5 -: (a) does not have any income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession”; and (b) is of the age of sixty years or more at any time during the previous year.
On perusal of the return of income and also the reassessment order that is completed, it is clear that for the relevant assessment year, assessee does not have any income chargeable under the head ‘profits and gains of business or profession’. On facts on record, it is clear that assessee is a senior citizen, aged 77 years. In light of the above provisions of section 207(2) of the Act, there is no liability on the assessee for payment of advance tax. Hence, levy of interest u/s.234B & 234C of the Act is uncalled for and we, delete the same.
As regards the interest levied u/s.234A of the Act is concerned, we notice that assessee has filed his return of income within the time prescribed in the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act. The notice u/s.148 of the Act is dated 29.03.2021. The said notice required the assessee to furnish the return of income within 30 days. The assessee has filed his return of income within 30 days i.e., on 28.04.2021. Copy of acknowledgment for filing of said return of income is on record at page 17 of the paper-book filed by the assessee. Since return of income has been furnished within the due
ITA No.636/CHNY/2026 :- 6 -: date prescribed in the notice, we delete the interest levied u/s.234A of the Act.
As regards the interest levied u/s.234D of the Act is concerned, the said amount is only consequential and is arising only on account of charging of interest u/s.234B & 234C of the Act. Since we have deleted the interest u/s.234B & 234C of the Act, the interest levied u/s.234D of the Act being consequential, is deleted.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12th May, 2026 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (जॉज� जॉज� के) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 12th May, 2026
RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Coimbatore 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR By Order 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. REKHA Digitally signed by REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.05.15 11:53:41 +05'30'
More judgments on Section 234A
- Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sarvjeet Singh Through Legal Heir Manjit… vs ITO Ward 1(1), AlwarITA 355/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026