Dr. Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax

254 ITR 755High Court2002#1893 most cited

What is Dr. Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax authority for?

Interest under Section 234A cannot be charged when tax has been paid, even if the return of income is filed belatedly, as such interest is compensatory and not penal in nature and only applies if there is a loss caused to the revenue.

61

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Dr Prannoy Roy v CIT · 254 ITR 755 · Section 234A interest · belated return · tax paid · compensatory interest · penal interest · loss to revenue · Section 139(1)

Also reported as

121 Taxmann 314

Sections most often in play

Section 234ASection 250Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 119Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(43)

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 215section 207section 2(43)section 262section 209section 2(1)section 208section 210section 115jaasection 140aminimum alternate tax

Judgments citing Dr. Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax

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

…Purposive meaning to be ascribed to “advance tax” 54. We feel that it would be fruitful to remember what was said by Sinha CJ (as his lordship then was), while speaking for a Division Bench of this court in Dr. Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income- tax: 254 ITR 755 (Del), with regard to the interpretation to be placed on the term ―advance tax‖ as defined in section 2(1) of the said Act. It was observed that an interpretation clause, as is well known, is not a positive enactment. It was specifically noticed that section 2 of the said Act began with the word ―unless the context otherwise requires‖. T…

TRISIGMA APEX SERVICES LLP,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 49(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 3148/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2021-22 Trisigma Apex Services Llp, Vs. Dcit, Circle 49(1), 01-0103, C-Block, Community New Delhi Centre, Imperial Tower, Civic Centre, Naraina Industrial Estate, New Delhi South West, New Delhi – 28 (Pan: Aahft4549G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Atul Ninawat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 234Section 234ASection 234iSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “H”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.YR. : 2021-22 TRISIGMA APEX SERVICES LLP, VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 49(1), 01-0103, C-BLOCK, COMMUNITY NEW DELHI CENTRE, IMPERIAL TOWER, CIVIC CENTRE, NARAINA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW DELHI SOUTH WEST, NEW DELHI – 28 (PAN: AAHFT4549G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Sh. Atul Ninawat, CA Respondent by : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR. Date of hearing : 12.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 20.11.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal ag…

M/S. ORIENTAL COMPONENTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 13(1)2, , MUMBAI

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

ITA 568/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhoriental Electrical Components Pvt. Ltd., 75Ab, Government Industrial Estate, Ganesh Nagar, Charkop, Kandivali West Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aaaco7101M ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-13(1) (2) Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Umang Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt, Ld. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(43)Section 234ASection 234BSection 246ASection 250

…e on the issue of charging of Interest keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharatbhai B. Shah versus Income-Tax Officer: (2013) 355 ITR 373 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy (2002) 254 ITR 755 (Del.) 5 Oriental Electrical Components Pvt. Ltd., 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 1st day of August, 2024. (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, दिन ांक/Dated: 01/08/2024 Sr. PS (Dhananjay) Copy of the Order forwarded to: अपील र्थी/The Appellant , 1.…

M/S. ORIENTAL ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 13(1)(2), , MUMBAI

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

ITA 567/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhoriental Electrical Components Pvt. Ltd., 75Ab, Government Industrial Estate, Ganesh Nagar, Charkop, Kandivali West Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aaaco7101M ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-13(1) (2) Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Umang Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt, Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

…in view the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharatbhai B. 4 Oriental Electrical Components Pvt. Ltd., Shah versus Income-Tax Officer: (2013) 355 ITR 373 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy (2002) 254 ITR 755 (Del.) 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 1st day of August, 2024. (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, दिन ांक/Dated: 01/08/2024 Sr. PS (Dhananjay) Copy of the Order forwarded to: अपील र्थी/The Appellant , 1. प्रदिव िी/ The Respondent. 2. आयकर आयुक्त CIT…

V.C.Nannapaneni vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/298/2007HC Telangana13 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 234BSection 260A

…led that interest under Section 234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another : 254 ITR 755 (Del.). In that case, the provisions of Section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under Section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the Revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meanin…

COLIN MARIO REBELLO,MUMBAI vs. ITO., WARD-23(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 423/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2021-22 Colin Mario Rebello, Ito, 501-502, Building-1, Ward-23(1)(1), Joanna Co-Operative Mumbai Vs. Society Ltd, Manuel Gonsalves Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaar5626F

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Punjabi, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ram Prakash Rastogi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234A

…t observed that it was well-settled that interest under section 23 4B was compensatory in character and th; it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Pr annoy Roy v. CIT [2002] 254 ITR 755. In that case, the provisions of section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the revenue that sue payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meaning of advance tax…

SHRI DHIRENDRA NARBHERAM SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 2 (3) (5), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 181/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 140ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 234B

…Court observed that it was well-settled that interestundersection234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy v. CIT [2002] 254 ITR 755. In that case, the provisions of section234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged undersection234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meaning of advance tax an…

M/S. ATLANTIC REALTOR PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5730/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Abhinav Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Aastha Lakshmi, Sr.D.R
Section 140Section 140ASection 143(2)Section 234Section 234ASection 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2011-12 Atlantic Realtor Private Ltd. DCIT, Circle 2(1) A-185, Suraj Mal Vihar New Delhi New Delhi 110 092 vs. PAN: AADFA2989D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Abhinav Gupta, CA. Department by : Mrs. Aastha Lakshmi, Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing : 05/03/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 03/06/2019 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 13/07/14 passed by LdCIT(A)-5, New Delhi for Assessment…

INDO AMINES LTD,DOMBIVALI vs. ITO WD 1(5), KALYAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1389/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.N. NandgaonkarFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 41(1)

…before us. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Ahmadabad Bench in the case of Patson Transformers Ltd v. DCIT [(2006) 6 SOT 673] and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy & Another v. CIT [254 ITR 755]. The calculation sheet is also furnished before us. According to the assessee the interest u/s. 234B of the Act should have been charged considering the amounts paid even after filing of return of income. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the Authorities below. On a careful consideration of the orders passed by the a…

INDO AMINES LTD,DOMBIVALI vs. ASST CIT CIR 1, KALYAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1388/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.N. NandgaonkarFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 41(1)

…before us. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Ahmadabad Bench in the case of Patson Transformers Ltd v. DCIT [(2006) 6 SOT 673] and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy & Another v. CIT [254 ITR 755]. The calculation sheet is also furnished before us. According to the assessee the interest u/s. 234B of the Act should have been charged considering the amounts paid even after filing of return of income. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the Authorities below. On a careful consideration of the orders passed by the a…

INDO AMINES LTD,DOMBIVALI vs. ASST CIT CIR 1, KALYAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1387/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.N. NandgaonkarFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 41(1)

…before us. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Ahmadabad Bench in the case of Patson Transformers Ltd v. DCIT [(2006) 6 SOT 673] and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy & Another v. CIT [254 ITR 755]. The calculation sheet is also furnished before us. According to the assessee the interest u/s. 234B of the Act should have been charged considering the amounts paid even after filing of return of income. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the Authorities below. On a careful consideration of the orders passed by the a…

SAMOSARAN YARNS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3849/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri D.B. SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 143(1)Section 234A

…ax which is payable prior to the filing of the return. It is in this light that the Cuttack Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Epari Sadasiva Rao (HUF) (supra), by referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy vs. CIT, 254 ITR 755 (Delhi) (which has since been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 309 ITR 231 (SC)) observed that the interest envisaged u/s 234A of the Act was not intended to be a penalty or punishment for delay in submission of return, but was compensatory in nature as the Revenue was deprived of timely payment of self-assessment tax. The Mumbai Bench of…

PURE DIETS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands dismissed

ITA 5070/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2013-14 Pure Diets India Ltd. Acit, Circle 20(1) 4E Uppal Plaza, M-6 Vs. New Delhi Jasola Dist. Centre New Delhi 110 025 Pan: Aadcp 8352 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Fca Respondent By Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr.D.R. Date Of Hearing 20/12/2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2017 Order Per Beena A Pillai

Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 234Section 234ASection 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2013-14 Pure Diets India Ltd. ACIT, Circle 20(1) 4E Uppal Plaza, M-6 vs. New Delhi Jasola Dist. Centre New Delhi 110 025 PAN: AADCP 8352 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, FCA Respondent by Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing 20/12/2017 Date of Pronouncement 28/12/2017 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 14/07/16 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-7, New Delhi for Assessment Year…

ROYAL CANIN INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 11(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 640/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Royal Canin India Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Asst. Cit 11(1)(1) 1401/1402, F Wing, 14Th Floor R.No.204, 2Nd Floor Lotus Corporate Park Aayakar Bhavan Cts No.185/A, Graham Forth M.K. Road, Compound, Western Express Mumbai – 400 020 Highway, Goregaon (E) Mumbai – 400 068 Pan/Gir No.Aadcr4417J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…fore the filing of return of income by the Appellant while computing the interest under section 234A of the Act.” 10. We have considered rival contentions and found that issue is squarely covered by the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Dr. Prannoy Roy 254 ITR 755 wherein Hon’ble High Court has held that no interest u/s.234A is payable in respect of amount of self assessment taxes which has been deposited prior to the due date of filing of the return. Accordingly, we direct the AO to recompute the interest u/s.234A by considering self assessment tax paid before filing of the return. We direct accordingly.…

SRI SURESH SHARMA vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER

Appeal stands disposed of

ITA/272/2015HC Karnataka21 Jan 2016

Bench: Taking Notice Of Self Assessment Payment Under Section 140A Of The Act On The Pretext That The Entire Tax In Accordance With The Declared Income Was Not Paid By Way Of Self Assessment Tax Before The Due Date Of Filing The Return?

Section 140ASection 143Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 260

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SUJATHA ITA No.272/2015 BETWEEN Sri. Suresh Sharma Aged 50 years S/o. late D.P. Sharma No.328, Sangeetha Bhavan, Tippu Sultan Road, Kalasipalyam, Bangalore – 560 002 …Appellant (By Sri. S. Parthasarathi & Ms. Jinita Chatterjee, Advocates) AND The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 3[1], IV Floor, Unity Building Annexe, Mission Road Bangalore – 560 027 …Respondent (By Sri. K.V. Aravind, Advocate) This…

CIT vs. BHARAT ALUMINIUM CO LTD

ITA/1890/2010HC Delhi11 May 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234CSection 244ASection 254

…ITA No. 1890 of 2010 Page 1 of 16 REPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.1890 of 2010 Reserved On: April 18, 2011 % Pronounced On: May 11, 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . APPELLANT through : Ms. P.L. Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Deepak Anand, Advocate. VERSUS BHARAT ALUMINIUM CO. LTD. . . .RESPONDENT through: Mr. M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Madhavi Swaroop, Advocate and Mr. Mayank Nagi, Advocate. CORAM :- HON’BLE MR…

THE COMMISSIOER OF INCOME TAX, vs. ANAND PRAKASH

ITA/116/2007HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 234BSection 260A

…led that interest under Section 234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another : 254 ITR 755 (Del.). In that case, the provisions of Section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under Section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the Revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meanin…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. MAHA MAYA GENERAL FINANCE LTD.

ITA/299/2007HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 234BSection 260A

…led that interest under Section 234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another : 254 ITR 755 (Del.). In that case, the provisions of Section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under Section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the Revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meanin…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANAND PRAKASH

ITA/121/2007HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 234BSection 260A

…led that interest under Section 234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another : 254 ITR 755 (Del.). In that case, the provisions of Section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under Section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the Revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meanin…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANAND PRAKASH

ITA/122/2007HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 234BSection 260A

…led that interest under Section 234B was compensatory in character and that it was not penal in nature. Another decision which would be relevant is of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another : 254 ITR 755 (Del.). In that case, the provisions of Section 234A were in issue. The question before the court was whether interest could be charged under Section 234A when, though the return had not been filed in time, the tax had been paid. The argument raised on behalf of the Revenue that such payment of tax did not strictly comply with the meanin…

Showing 1–20 of 61 · Page 1 of 4