CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

252 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2001#156 most cited

What is CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala authority for?

Levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Tax statutes are to be interpreted strictly, allowing no room for purposive interpretation.

452

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 368,382 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala · 252 ITR 1 · mandatory interest · section 234A · section 234B · section 234C · levy of interest · strict interpretation tax laws · purposive interpretation · interest calculation

Also reported as

119 Taxmann 352

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 234ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 215section 210interest u/s 234csection 115jainterest under section 234cinterest under section 234asection 21mistake apparent on recordinterest u/s 234binterest under section 234bsection 234csection 260

Judgments citing CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

Hasmukhbhai Jayantibhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 410/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. DR
Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…section 201(1A) of the Act use the expression “shall”, which leaves no discretion with the authorities in the matter of levy of interest. The CIT(Appeals) placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1), wherein it has been held that such interest cannot be waived on the ground of reasonable cause or hardship. Accordingly, the levy of interest was held to be in accordance with law and Ground No. Hasmukhbhai Jayantibhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year –2015-16 - 4– 03 was also dismissed. The remaining grounds being general and consequential in nature were…

Ericsson India Global Services Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Spl. Range 3, New Delhi

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

ITA 2367/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(13)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 254(2)Section 92C

…ith law that was in force. Therefore, it is obvious that there was no failure on the part of the appellant to pay advance tax in accordance with the provisions of sections 208 and 209. So far as the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ghaswala [20011 252 ITR 1 is concerned, the Supreme Court was concerned with the 1908/Del/2017 powers of the Settlement Commission in granting waiver of interest and for that purpose the Supreme Court considered the provisions of sections 234A, 234B and 234C. The Supreme Court in no uncertain terms held that the interest is compensatory in nature. The court read the provisi…

Sarfarazkhan Sarvarkhan Pathan, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2016/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri P D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…porting explanation. The request for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A was rejected as no such evidence was actually filed. The levy of interest was upheld by relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M. H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) holding that charging of interest is mandatory. The ground relating to initiation of penalty proceedings was dismissed as premature. Sarfarazkhan Sarvarkhan Pathan vs. ITO Asst.Year –2012-13 - 5– 6. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order passed by CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Before us, the ld. counsel for the…

Proform Interiors Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT CC-20, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2022-23 in ITA

ITA 2708/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos. 4153 & 4008/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19) Dcit, Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ground Floor, Jmd Regent Room No. 269A, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Plaza, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Haryana-122001. Extn., Delhi-110055. Pan-Aahcs5999J

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all and that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden, applied to Judicial Officers making a record under Section 164.'. Thus, as held in CIT v. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala 119 Taxman 352/252 ITR 1 (SC), by the Constitutional Bench that 'it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in a ITA Nos.4153,4008, 2708 to 2717/Del/2025 authority to be exercised in a particular manner then the said authority has to exercise it only in the manner provided in the statue itself. If that be so, since the Commission cannot ex…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 99/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 253

…the appellant has challenged the charging of Interest under various provisions of Act. It is settled position of law that charging of interest is mandatory and consequential in nature as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1(SC), However, the AO is directed to recalculate the correct Interest while giving effect to this order. Thus, appeal on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 3.6 Ground No. 9 for AYs (2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 to 2018-19) and Ground no. 8 for 2019-20: Being general in nature this ground needs not any special adjudication. Rohit Darak I…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

In the result, the “Impugned order” is set aside as & by

ITA 104/IND/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.99 to 104/Ind/2025 (AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 & 2016-2017 & 2019-20) Rohit Kumar Dharak, ACIT Central-2 बनाम/ 9, Bhoj Nagar, Annapurna Bhopal Vs. Road, Near Dwarka Garden, Indore (PAN: AXFPD4087L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, AR Revenue by Shri Anup Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 15.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 30.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch of 06 appeals has been filed by the Asse…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 103/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 253

…the appellant has challenged the charging of Interest under various provisions of Act. It is settled position of law that charging of interest is mandatory and consequential in nature as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1(SC), However, the AO is directed to recalculate the correct Interest while giving effect to this order. Thus, appeal on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 3.6 Ground No. 9 for AYs (2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 to 2018-19) and Ground no. 8 for 2019-20: Being general in nature this ground needs not any special adjudication. 4. Accordingl…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 102/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 253

…the appellant has challenged the charging of Interest under various provisions of Act. It is settled position of law that charging of interest is mandatory and consequential in nature as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1(SC), However, the AO is directed to recalculate the correct Interest while giving effect to this order. Thus, appeal on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 3.6 Ground No. 9 for AYs (2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 to 2018-19) and Ground no. 8 for 2019-20: Being general in nature this ground needs not any special adjudication. 4. Accordingl…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 101/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 253

…the appellant has challenged the charging of Interest under various provisions of Act. It is settled position of law that charging of interest is mandatory and consequential in nature as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1(SC), However, the AO is directed to recalculate the correct Interest while giving effect to this order. Thus, appeal on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 3.6 Ground No. 9 for AYs (2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 to 2018-19) and Ground no. 8 for 2019-20: Being general in nature this ground needs not any special adjudication. 4. Accordingl…

Rohit Darak, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

ITA 100/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 253

…the appellant has challenged the charging of Interest under various provisions of Act. It is settled position of law that charging of interest is mandatory and consequential in nature as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1(SC), However, the AO is directed to recalculate the correct Interest while giving effect to this order. Thus, appeal on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 3.6 Ground No. 9 for AYs (2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 to 2018-19) and Ground no. 8 for 2019-20: Being general in nature this ground needs not any special adjudication. 4. Accordingl…

Sophos Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

…ith law that was in force. Therefore, it is obvious that there was no failure on the part of the appellant to pay advance tax in accordance with the provisions of sections 208 and 209. So far as the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ghaswala (20011 252 ITR 1 is concerned, the Supreme Court was concerned with the powers of the Settlement Commission in granting waiver of interest and for that purpose the Supreme Court considered the provisions of sections 234A, 2348 and 234C. The Supreme Court in no uncertain terms held that the interest is compensatory in nature. The court read the provisions of section…

DCIT, CC-14, New Delhi vs. A.P. Securitas Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

In the result, application for condonation of delay of 52 days in filing of appeal is allowed and appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3077/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. A. P. Securitas Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-14, 10-Dda, Commercial Complex, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaca1315R

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80J

…na fide hardship" and "reasonable delay" is contrary to settled law. When the statute itself prescribes a mandatory condition, neither equity nor hardship can override express statutory mandate.  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) - (Para 17) held that equitable considerations cannot prevail over statutory provisions in tax law.  Thus, the plea of marginal delay of 52 days or bona fide circumstances cannot vest the assessee with a right which the statute expressly denies. A. P. Securitas Pvt. Ltd 7. CPC's Action Valid and Justified  CPC rightly invoked adjustment u/…

Smt. Shree Jain, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai

In the result, we hold that

ITA 2565/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsmt. Shree Jain, 17/1, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Anurag Ali Asker Rod, Off. Tax, Central Circle-5(2), Mumbai. Chunningham Road, 1/24, Room No.634, Aayakar Bhawan, Marsh Bangalore-560052. Karve Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- 400020. Pan/Gir No:Aarpj4573A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

…No.2565/MUM/2025/AY 2016-17 Smt. Shree Jain 9. The next ground is levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Levy of interest under the above provisions of the Act are mandatory, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1 (SC). Hence, the ground is dismissed. 10. The next ground is initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Only the penalty proceedings have been initiated and penalty has not yet been levied. Therefore, the decision of the CIT(A) that the ground is premature in nature cannot be faulted with. Accordingly, the ground is dismissed.…

Hydrise Foods Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh, India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 87/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…at way or not at all and ITA Nos. 86 & 87/AGR/2024 Hydrise Foods Pvt. Ltd that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden, applied to Judicial Officers making a record under Section 164.'. Thus, as held in CIT v. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala 119 Taxman 352/252 ITR 1 (SC), by the Constitutional Bench that 'it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in a authority to be exercised in a particular manner then the said authority has to exercise it only in the manner provided in the statue itself. If that be so, since the Commission cannot exercise the power of relaxation found in Se…

Hydrise Foods Private Limited, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 86/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…at way or not at all and ITA Nos. 86 & 87/AGR/2024 Hydrise Foods Pvt. Ltd that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden, applied to Judicial Officers making a record under Section 164.'. Thus, as held in CIT v. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala 119 Taxman 352/252 ITR 1 (SC), by the Constitutional Bench that 'it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in a authority to be exercised in a particular manner then the said authority has to exercise it only in the manner provided in the statue itself. If that be so, since the Commission cannot exercise the power of relaxation found in Se…

Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel L/H Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward 5, Navsari

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

ITA 345/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel, Vs. Ito, L/H Of Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel Ward - 5, 16, Shrinikunj Society, Ashabaug, Navsari Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abjpp3114G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ment’ assessment u/s 144 of the Act, the CIT(A) is vested with the authority to set aside such assessment and remand the matter to AO for fresh evaluation. He also referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Anjum M H Ghaswala, (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) wherein it was held that charging of interest u/s 234A/B/C is mandatory and not at the discretion of the AO. Accordingly, he set aside the order of AO for de novo adjudication. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submitted paper b…

M/s.V.R.Farms Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/272/2008HC Telangana28 Nov 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

…nt of interest on advance tax arose for determination before the High Court which warranted interpretation of section 115JAA read with sections 234B and 234C. Reference was then made to the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252 ITR 1 wherein the Supreme Court held that the provisions of sections 234A, 234B and 234C were mandatory in nature and that the Income Tax Settlement Commission, in exercise of its power under section 245D(4) and (6), did not have the power to reduce or waive interest statutorily payable under sections 234A, 234B and 234C except to the extent of gran…

Nutan Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1023/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 10(15)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 263Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viia)

…v. CIT (326 ITR 642), in which the Supreme Court held that in tax statutes particularly, there is no room for intendment when the provision contains clear and unambiguous language. Further, the decision of the Constitution Bench in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) reinforces the principle that where the statute contains mandatory language, neither the tax authorities nor appellate forums can dilute or modify the statutory prescription. These judicial precedents make it abundantly clear that plain statutory language must prevail over any interpretative attempt. 12. Applying these principles to the present ca…

Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, Petlad vs. I.T.O Ward 1(3)(1), Petlad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 474/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was held to be consequential and mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 4– Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Special Bench in Motorola Inc. v. DCIT (96 TTJ 1). The ground challenging initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) was also dismissed as being consequential. The remaining grounds being general in nature were treated as dismissed. Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in entirety. 5. The…

Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, Petlad vs. I.T.O Ward 1(3)(1), Petlad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 473/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was held to be consequential and mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 4– Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Special Bench in Motorola Inc. v. DCIT (96 TTJ 1). The ground challenging initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) was also dismissed as being consequential. The remaining grounds being general in nature were treated as dismissed. Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in entirety. 5. The…