“interest under section 234A”

InterestSection 234ASection 234A1,249 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest under section 234A is CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1), cited in 452 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest under section 234A

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

252 ITR 1 · 2001 · Supreme Court

452

citing judgments

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.

Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT

98 ITR 167 · 1975 · Supreme Court

185

citing judgments

Interest on borrowed capital utilized for acquiring a capital asset is capitalized until business commences. Once business is set up, this interest is deductible under section 36(1)(iii) even if the asset has not yet been put to use, accepting commercial accounting standards in the absence of contrary statutory provisions.

Karanvir Singh Gossal v. CIT

349 ITR 692 · 2012 · Supreme Court

158

citing judgments

The Supreme Court's decision establishes principles or grounds for seeking a waiver of mandatory interest levied under Sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.

215 Taxmann 108 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

The provision of an extended credit period or non-charging of interest on delayed receivables from associated enterprises constitutes an international transaction under Section 92B(1) and requires separate benchmarking at arm's length, even retrospectively due to the Finance Act, 2012 amendment.

Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO

409 ITR 567 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act is barred if the issue in question is already pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), as per Explanation 1(c) to Section 263.

DIT v. Mitshubishi Corporation

130 Taxmann.com 276 · 2021 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The Supreme Court's decision in DIT Vs. Mitshubishi Corporation covers the chargeability of interest under section 234B of the Act.

Punjab Stainless Steel Inds v. CIT

324 ITR 396 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

This case establishes that merely having sufficient interest-free own funds does not automatically prevent interest disallowance on interest-free advances; the assessee must affirmatively prove the business or commercial expediency of such advances.

Dr. Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income-tax

254 ITR 755 · 2002 · High Court

citing judgments

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.

Judgments citing interest under section 234A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(2), Bengaluru vs. Tata Communications (Uk) Limited, United Kingdom

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO of the assesseeare dismissed

ITA 39/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.39/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. Ketan Ved, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 115A(1)(b)Section 147Section 148ASection 234ASection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

rate of 15 % instead of 10% as per the provisions of section 115A(1)(b) of the Act. 4. Ground 4: Interest under section 234A. 4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DCIT(IT) has erred in levying interest u/s. 234A

Capita India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Mumbai

ITA 4954/MUM/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025

For Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Ramesh Dandumal Chachlani, Ulhasnagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2), Kalyan, Mumbia

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

ITA 4874/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 234ASection 274

additional evidences filed by the Appellant which were necessary in dispensing with the justice. 6.The Ld. AO, NeAC, has erred in the levying interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. 8.The Ld. AO, has erred in initiating penalty proceeding u/s 274 r.w.s.270A of the Act. 9.The Appellant craves

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Smt Reena Sudhir Mehta, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/MUM/2023[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2025AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel (Spl. Counsel for the department), Sr. DR

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 250

assessee towards interest expenses. Ground raised by the assessee is allowed 17. Ground No. 4 raised by the assessee is with regard to interest under section 234A and 234B which are consequential not warranting any separate adjudication. 18. Ground No. 3 of the revenue is general not warranting any separate

Shri Vijay Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

The appeals are allowed

ITA 928/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal, Ccountant Member Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Zscaler Inc., Vs Dcit, 120, Holger Way San Jose, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), California, Usa, Delhi. Usa 95134. Pan: Aaacz4350P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate; Shri Kishore Kunal, Advocate; Ms Ankita Prakash, Advocate; & Shri Govind Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.10.2023 & 22.01.2025 Passed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Appellant. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO, has erred in charging interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. 11. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty

Shree Vishwakarma Sutradhar Sampati Trust, Bikaner vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Bikaner

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 305/JODH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hearing On The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 250

income at Rs. 1,92,751/- taking the status of the assessee Trust as ‘AOP’ instead of ‘Trust’, to be taxed MMR and interest under section 234A and 234B have been charged as per the provisions of the IT Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee

Aswathnarayanaiah Rathnamma Raamesh, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 188/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 69Section 69ASection 80C

applicable, addition of agricultural income Rs. 72,50,000 as income from other sources should be fully deleted. 6. Levy of interest under section 234A and 234B 6.1. The learned AO erred in levying the interest u/s 234A and 234B. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Kakarama Halli Chnksanaweegowda Shantham Chandu, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer 3(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1988/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Shraddha N.D., CAFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 234Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

under section 234 of the Income Tax Act under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant contends that the levy of interest under section 234A , 234 B and 234 C of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted

Bhaniyawala Kisaan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Limited, Deharadun vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(2), Dehradun

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 12/DDN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 270A(10)(a)Section 271FSection 8Section 80ASection 80P

deduction under section 80P without filing the Income Tax Return (hereinafter, the ‘ITR’) under section 139(1) of the Act, iii. Chargeability of interest under section 234A & 234B of the Act and iv. Initiation of penalties under the Act. 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that ... section 80P of the Act raised by the assessee. It is ordered accordingly. 10. As far as the issues relating to chargeability of interest under section 234A & 234B of the Act and initiation of penalties under the Act are concerned, these are either consequential or premature; therefore, these grounds stand

Nasimbanu Mirza, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(8)- Currently the ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 376/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 376/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बनाम/ Nasimbanu Mirza Ito B/67, Mayurpark Society, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. Opp. Bibi Talab, Vatva, Daskroi, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 382440 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bfkpm6262E (Appellant / Cross Objector) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Foziya Saiyed, A.R. Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr Revenue By : 25/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2025

For Appellant: Ms. Foziya Saiyed, A.RFor Respondent: 25/03/2025

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

consequent penalties / late fees / fine under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) or any other section and interest under section 234A,234B, 234C, 234D or any other section should be deleted. 4). The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

Plr Textiles Ltd., Chennai vs. The ACIT, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 133/CHNY/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 133/Chny/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 Plr Textiles Ltd., The Acit, 8K, Century Plaza, V. Corporate Circle -5(2), 560-562, Mount Road, Chennai – 641 034. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacp-6536-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, Vide Ita No.153/Cit(A)-3/2018-19For The Assessment Year 2005-06, Dated 13.03.2020. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 346 Days In Appeal Filed By The Assessee, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition Filed By The Assessee, Reason For Delay In Filing The Appeal Was Due To Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Hearing Both The :-2-:

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

this order 9,81,88,359 7. Credit to prepaid taxes and self assessment tax are given as available in ITD. Interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C are charged as per law. Demand notice u/s 156 is enclosed. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred

Firdos Shahnawazuddin Siddiqui, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 823/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 2(47)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

whereas the Appellant had submitted a copy of the bank passbook duly reflecting the entry of FD closure proceeds; 14. Erred in levying interest under Section 234A and Section 234B of the Act; and 15. Erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A and Section 271AAC

Cvent India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in both the A

ITA 187/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: ShriDheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. DR

Section 92CSection 92D

herein after referred to as "STPI") Scheme. 10. That the Ld. AO/ Ld. CIT(A) erred in facts and in law in charging interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act 11. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

Ab Sciex Pte. Ltd, Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 804/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 44B

grounds Ground 11: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in la w the Ld. AO has erred in levying the interest under section 234A & 234B of the Act. Ground 12: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. AO has erred

Oceaneering International Gmbh, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It) 3(2)(2), Air India Building, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 of the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 4670/MUM/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 274Section 44B

relying on the judgements which are distinguishable on the facts of the appellant and the available jurisprudence on the issue. 3. Levy of interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act 3.1 The Id. AO erred in levying interest of under Section 234A of Rs.1,41,840/-, under

Randive Builders and Developers, Maharashtra vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kolhapur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1833/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(4)Section 154Section 69C

record. It is not covered u/s 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. AO and CIT (A) has erred in calculating interest under section 234A, section 234B and section 234C 4. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal

Randive Builders and Developers, Maharashtra vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kolhapur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1378/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(4)Section 154Section 69C

Wanbury Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6664/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153(1)

providing any basis to arrive at such price. 15. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act.” 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of marketing domestic branded drugs and pharmaceuticals products. The assessee ... grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed. 15. Ground No.15 of the assessee is with regard to levy of interest under section 234A of the Act. In this regard it is submitted by the ld AR that the assessee has filed the return of income within

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. The Dy-CIT (Int. Taxation)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 749/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Dcit (International Taxation)- Investment Bank (Formerly 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT BEENA PILLAI, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T. (TP

Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. The Dy.CIT of Income Tax (Internationsl Taxation) -2(1) (1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1234/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT BEENA PILLAI, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T. (TP