← 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

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 960/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 2.34B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing ... questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing to initiate

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 959/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 2.34B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing ... questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing to initiate

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1306/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 2.34B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing ... questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing to initiate

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1305/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 2.34B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing ... questioning the commercial expediency of the Appellant That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 3. proposing to levy interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. That the learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in 4. proposing to initiate

DCIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ecgc Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3813/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands dismissed. Ground No.4 : Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 36. This ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands

DCIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ecgc Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3812/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234Section 234B

ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands dismissed. Ground No.4 : Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 36. This ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands

Ranjan Suresh Ghia, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(3) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 3575/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Sajal SaravariyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 249(2)Section 250Section 69

above, Learned AO erred, on facts and in law in raising a demand for income-tax of Rs. 14,81,553 and interest under section 234A of Rs. 14,02,551 and under section 234B of Rs. 15,59,934 on the Appellant. vi. Without prejudice to the above

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. ACIT, New Marine Lines Mumbai

ITA 3551/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234Section 234B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. ACIT, New Marine Lines Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3544/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands dismissed. Ground No.4 : Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 36. This ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3543/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands dismissed. Ground No.4 : Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 36. This ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. AO, New Marine Lines, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3542/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands dismissed. Ground No.4 : Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 36. This ground of the assessee is consequential in nature which does not require any adjudication, hence the same stands

Deepak Dudeja (L/H of Sh. Manohar Lal), Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Gurgaon

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

ITA 2839/DEL/2023[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Deepak Dudeja Vs Ito, [Legal Heir Of Late Shri Manohar Ward 2(4), Lal], Cw-66, Malibu Town, Gurgaon. Sohna Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122018. Pan-Acepl00503F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Monalisa Maity, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2024

Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

under section 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b) and 271F upon a deceased person. 7. That the Ld. AO has erred in charging interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C upon a deceased person. 8. That the above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another. 9. That

Vijaykumar Mansukhlal Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (3) (5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3506/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalvijay Kumar Mansukhlal Mehta, 156, Cooper Compound, T. P. Street, Kumbhar Wada, 6Th Lane, Mumbai-400 004 Pan: Agapm3179N ..... Appellant Vs. Ito 19(3) (5) Piramal Chamber, Mumbai ..... Respondent & Ito 19(3) (5) Piramal Chamber, Mumbai ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Usha Gaikwad, Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 234ASection 250

being 6.5% of total bogus purchase of Rs. 8,17,78,409/-. 2. The Ld. CIT erred in charging interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act 3. The appellant crave leave to add, amend, alter and / or vary any of the grounds of appeal before

Js Capital Llc, Mumbai vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle 3 (1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3396/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Js Capital Llc, Acit (International C/O Vasa Chauhan & Taxation) Associates, Circle-3(1)(1), Off. No.41, 3Rd Floor, Room No.1605, Vs. 16Th Floor, Hi Life Premises, P.M. Road, Air India Building, Santacruz West, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaecj2857M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Hirali Desai, A.R. Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.R. Shri Nirmal Hardik, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07 . 02 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 02 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Amarjit Singh: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Acit, International Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Mumbai Dated 26.07.2023 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The [Final Assessment] Order [Dated 26 July 2023] Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax - International Tax Circle 3(1)(1) Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, D.R
Section 111ASection 115ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 270ASection 70(2)

misstatement by the Ld. AO in Ground 5 above, the 3 M/s. JS Capital LLC Ld. AO erred in consequential levying interest under section 234A & 234B of the Act amounting to INR 393,334,944/-- 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Supermax Personal Care P. Ltd., Thane vs. Dy CIT -3(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed in above terms

ITA 687/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Gupta & Shri AjinkyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. DR
Section 250Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 92C

Erred in non-granting credit of self-assessment tax paid by the Appellant amounting to INR 3, 93,730/-. Incorrect levy of interest under section 234A of the Act of INR 44, 10,170/- 16. erred in levying interest of INR 44,10,170 under section 234A

Saic Motor Overseas Intelligent Mobility Technology Co . Ltd., Shanghai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Hsiidc Building

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

ITA 2194/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)

being beneficial to the appellant non-resident would apply. 3 6. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in levying interest under section 234A of the Act without appreciating that the income tax return was filed within the extended due date for filing the tax return ... entire tax liability has been discharged by way of TDS. The Ld. DR conceded to the submissions of the Ld. AR. 14.1 Interest under section 234A is levied only in cases where the assessee does not furnish its return of income or furnishes it after the due date prescribed under

Assotech Moonshine Urban Developers Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

Assessee. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has erred in levying /charging interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Act. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO has erred ... Tribunal and Ground No. 2 and 3 relate thereto. Ground No. 1 is of general nature. Ground No. 5 relating to charging of interest under section 234A and 234B is consequential. Ground No. 6 is about initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act which

Shamanna Reddy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1120/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojarind Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. Shamanna Reddy, Vs. Ito, C/O. Chowdeshwari Rice Building, Ward – 4(1)(3), Opp. Hi Look Bakery, Bengaluru. Kasavanahalli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560 035. Pan : Ccwpr 8342 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Nischal, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

Ge Energy Parts Inc, Wildwood Parkway Atlanta Ga Us vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-1(3)(1), International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3199/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2021-22]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 44BSection 9(1)(i)Section 90

without providing any computation. 10. That on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest under section 234A and 244B of the Act. 11. That on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty under section

Ramappa Laxman Naduvin, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Belagavi

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

ITA 36/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18 Ramappa Laxman Naduvin Kadabi, Saundatti Belgaum 591129 Ito Vs. Karnataka Ward-5 Belagavi Pan No.Ajspr3237R Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.R. Revenue By : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 115BSection 234ASection 250Section 69A

treated as income for the year, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 2346 and 234C of the Act in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the learned