← All Phrases

“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
92
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
85
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
70
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
66
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
61
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

Maxport India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

ITA 581/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 154Section 234A

with this common order. 3. The common issue raised by the assessee in all the above appeals is relating to the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO by way of rectification order passed under section ... Counsel for the Assessee has contended that non levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C in the assessment order does not constitute a mistake apparent on record, therefore the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Maxport India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

ITA 580/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 154Section 234A

with this common order. 3. The common issue raised by the assessee in all the above appeals is relating to the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO by way of rectification order passed under section ... Counsel for the Assessee has contended that non levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C in the assessment order does not constitute a mistake apparent on record, therefore the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Maxport India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-, Chandigarh

ITA 578/CHANDI/2023[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Nov 2024

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 154Section 234A

with this common order. 3. The common issue raised by the assessee in all the above appeals is relating to the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO by way of rectification order passed under section ... Counsel for the Assessee has contended that non levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C in the assessment order does not constitute a mistake apparent on record, therefore the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Maxport India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Asst. Commissioner Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh

ITA 577/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 154Section 234A

with this common order. 3. The common issue raised by the assessee in all the above appeals is relating to the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO by way of rectification order passed under section ... Counsel for the Assessee has contended that non levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C in the assessment order does not constitute a mistake apparent on record, therefore the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Maxport India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh.

ITA 576/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 154Section 234A

with this common order. 3. The common issue raised by the assessee in all the above appeals is relating to the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO by way of rectification order passed under section ... Counsel for the Assessee has contended that non levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C in the assessment order does not constitute a mistake apparent on record, therefore the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Sanjay Subhash Yerunkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-27(3)(1), Mumbai, Vashi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4417/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am Sanjay Subhash Yerunkar Ito-27(3)(1) Room No. 422, 4Th Floor, C/O. Ca Himanshu Gandhi Chartered Accountants, 16Th Floor, D Wing, Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Station, Vs. Trade World Tower, Commercial Complex, Vashi, Kamala Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Adipy 5466 F (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi Respondent By : Shri Asif Karmali Date Of Hearing : 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

hire 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming charging of Interest under section 234A, 234B of Income Tax Act, 1961 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming

Hcl Technologies Norway As, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2300/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

resident Appellant. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in levying interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before

Hcl Australia Services Pty Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2299/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

resident Appellant. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in levying interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before

Hcl Singapore Pte. Ltd (Successor to Axon Solutions Singapore Pte Limited), Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

ITA 2298/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 153(2)

resident Appellant. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in levying interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before

Vanasowrabha Associates, Warangal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Warangal

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

ITA 439/HYD/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Oct 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: : Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234A

Amrutamsha Infratech India Private Limited, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The Appellant denies himself liable to be charged to interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, under the facts and circumstances of the case. ITA No.439/Hyd/2023 3 11. The Appellant

The Mahabeej Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Akola, Akola vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/NAG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 234ASection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

bank being co-operative society is allowable deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of I.T. Act 1961. 5. The assessee denies liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961. Without prejudice, levy of interest under section 234A, 234C and 234C

DCIT, CC-1(3), Nagpur vs. Radhika Vegetables Oils Pvt. Ltd., Vizianagram

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

ITA 236/NAG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

learned CIT(A) by dismissing the grounds no.1, 2 and 3, raised by the Revenue. 10. Ground No. 6, relates to charging of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 7. Charging of interest being consequential and mandatory in nature, the Assessing Officer is directed to give

Puttegowda Ravikumar, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mysore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1776/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavputtegowda Ravikumar The Income Tax Officer-1(1) 201, Belvadi Post 21/16, 'Aayakar Bhavan' Vs. Koorgahaly, Mysore 570018 Residency Road, Nazarabad Pan – Aezpr9904H Mysore 570010 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Tharun Kothari, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.10.2024 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy S., A.M. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 30.07.2024 For Ay 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Order Of The Learned Assessing Officer In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Equity & Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Appellant Denies Himself Liable To Be Assessed To A Total Income Of Rs.52,96,021/- For The Impugned Assessment Year 2018-19 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 3. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Raised A Defect For Delay In Filing The Appeal, On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Tharun Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 37Section 69

that "consent cannot confer jurisdiction" on the facts and circumstance of the case. 8. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the learned assessing

Nitin Amratlal Brahmbhatt, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC2(1), Mumbai

ITA 3228/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2024AY 2019-20
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 69A

justified and the same may be deleted. 4. The Appellant denies the liability imposed on account of the interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D and the same maybe deleted.” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Appellant filed return of income for the Assessment Year

Chandanahalli Nagarajaiah Shashikiran, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1505/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavchandanahalli Nagarajaiah Acit, Circle - 2(2)(1) Shashikiran Bmtc Building No. 1954, 8Th Main, 'E' Block Vs. Koramangala Rajajinagar, Bangalore 560010 Bengluru 560095 Pan – Assps8286Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ravindra M. Hegde, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy S., A.M. This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 07.06.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1) The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Natural Justice, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case. 2) The Appellant Denies Himself Liable To Be Assessed Total Income Of Rs. 4,39,15,228/- Against The Return Of Income Of Rs. 1,46,83,360/- On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra M. Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

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

Spafi-Societe De Participations Financieres Et Industrielles, France vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax, Circle-4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2072/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: Shri Akram khan / Ms. SiyaFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234B

grounds raised by the assessee are as under: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under section 234A of Rs. 1,80,80,410/-. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under section 234B ... only grievance of the assessee is that since it has filed its return of income within the extended due date and therefore, interest under section 234A of the Act which is levied for late filing of return of income cannot be levied and therefore, interest under SPAFI-Societe De participations

Akash Anand Puri, Nagpur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2) Nagpur, Nagpur

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

ITA 432/NAG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 46ASection 69A

assessee gets relief of ` 1,51,77,749 i.e., [` 1,53,31,060 (–) ` 1,53,311]. 9. Ground no.10, relates to levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 10. The assessee has denied the liability of interest charged under section 234A, 234B and 234C

Bholaram Malviya, Mumbai vs. ITO, Mumbai

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

ITA 4076/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhribholaram Malviya V/S. Ito, Ward-16(1)(1), बनाम Cosmos Plaza, 706, Dn Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Nagar Metro Station, Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aampm7312D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Niral ManglaFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 68

computed tax liability thereupon. 7. That the Ld. AO has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in charging excessive interest under Section 234A of the Act despite the fact that the ITR for the year under consideration was filed by the assessee on 30/03/2017. 8. That

Raghav Agarwalla, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, International Tax Ward 1(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4258/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Raghav Agarwalla, Ito, International Tax Ward 1(1)(1), 13/14, Buckley Court, Room No. 1817, 18Th Floor, Air India Vs. 5 Woodhouse Road, Colaba, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Ahbpa 8174 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Anil Sant, Addl. CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. K. Gopal/Akhilesh Deshmukh
Section 1Section 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

surcharge by the Ld.A.O. is not justified and the same may be deleted. justified and the same may be deleted. IV. Levy of interest under section 234A, IV. Levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act 234B and 234C of the Act is unjustified. is unjustified ... justified in levying interest under section 234A, A.O. is not justified in levying interest under section 234A, A.O. is not justified in levying interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act without appreciating the facts and 234C of the Act without appreciating the facts and 234C

Varun Manjunatha, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1278/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Varghese, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234ASection 250

order is required to be quashed on the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to pay additional tax as determined