POWER WELFARE ORGANISATION,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 3(2), GURGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the levy of interest under Section 234B, finding no reason to interfere with the order of the lower authorities. The assessee failed to provide any justification for why the interest was not leviable.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2010-11. The primary ground of appeal was the levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the Assessing Officer was justified in levying interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Gurgaon dated 11.06.2018. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
“Whether the Ld.AO is justified in levying interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. That the appellant reserves the right to amend, delete, add, substitute, modify or alter any one or more of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”
No one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite various opportunities.
Therefore, the appeal was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being disposed off on the basis of material available on record.
The only effective ground in this appeal is levy of interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).
Ld.Sr.DR submitted that levy of penalty u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has rightly levied the interest u/s 234B of the Act.
I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on records.
The assessee has not given any reason as to why the interest u/s 234B of the Act is not leviable under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere in the order of authorities below, the same is hereby affirmed. Thus, ground raised by the assessee is dismissed.
More judgments on Section 234B
- Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- 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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
