“interest under section 234A”

Meenu Ajay Pathak, Mumbai vs. I.T.O.-32(2)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemeenu Ajay Pathak V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 32(2)(3) C-11, Room No. 305, 3Rd Floor 4, Shree Bhalchandra Kripa Bldg Pratyakshkar Bhavan Daulat Nagar, Road No. 3 Bandra Kurla Complex Borivali (E), Mumbai - 400066 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Agopp6363P (Appellant) (Respondent)

addition is made against the principles of natural justice and the same may be deleted. 4. The Appellant denies any liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Hence, the same are not leviable. Page No. 2 3 Meenu Ajay Pathak 5. The Appellant craves

Rishabh Metals and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CPC, DCIT -Cir 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blerishabh Metals & Chemicals V. Dcit-Circle -1(3)(1) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 4Th Floor, Eross Theatre Bldg Mumbai - 400020 Jt Road, Churchgate Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacr2214E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : None Department Represented By : Shri P.D. Chougule

disallowance made under section 36(1)(va) is not justified and the same may be deleted. 4. The learned AO erred in levying interest under section 234A, 234B, and 234C, without appreciating the facts that the appellant denies his liability to the same. 5. The Appellant craves leave

Colaba Sangita Co. Op Hsg Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blecolaba Sangita Coop Hsg Ltd V. Commissioner Of Income Tax 27/28 Colaba Sangita Co-Op Mumbai Housing Soc Ltd, Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba Mumbai- 400005 Pan: Aaaac1325P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Deepika Arora

stating that it is not within the preview of concept of mutuality. 2. The Ld. CIT erred in confirming the charging of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the income tax act 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT erred in initiating the penalty proceeding under section 274 r.w.s

Micro Focus Software Inc. (Formerly Known As Novell Inc.), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-Circle-3(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

there was no basis for the Assessing Officer to seek to initiate proceedings under section 270A of the Act. 11. The levy of interest under section 234A and 2348 of the Act is consequential in nature.” 3. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record ... no.10, is pertaining to the initiation of penalty proceedings, which is premature in nature and therefore is dismissed. 14. Further, the charging of interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Act is consequential in nature. Therefore, ground no.11, is allowed for statistical purposes. 15. Ground No. 12, is general

Cma Cgm Sa, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, additional grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 833/मुं/2023 ("न.व. 2020-21) Cma Cgm Sa C/O. Cma Cgm Agencies (India) Private Limited, Indiabulls Finance Centre, Tower -3, 8Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone(W), Mumbai – 400 013. Pan: Aabcc-9048-G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(1)(1)Mumbai Room No.1713, 17Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Poojari & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 31/05/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : /06/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 19/01/2023 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [ In Short ‘The Act], For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2 2. In Appeal The Assessee Has Raised 22 Grounds. The Gist Of Grounds Of Appeal Is As Under:

assessee in India. Ground No. 15-19 - Non-taxability of income in the nature of IT support services (FTS). Ground No.20 – Interest under section 234A of the Act. Ground No.21 – Interest u/s. 234B of the Act. Ground No.22 – Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 270 of the Act. 3. Shri Rajesh

Smit Singapore Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Int Taxation)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 44BB of the Act, wherein 10% of the gross receipts shall be deemed to be income of the Appellant; Levy of interest under section 234A of Rs 2,87,582 erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to Rs 2,87,582; 8. Levy ... raised on without prejudice basis. Therefore, in view of aforesaid findings, the same needs no separate adjudication. 19. Insofar as the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act is concerned, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication

Ernst & Youg Merchant Banking Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Asst. Comm of Income Tax, CPC, Karnataka

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm)

mention, the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of being heard. 7. The assessee has raised certain more grounds regarding charging of interest under section 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. These are consequential in nature and hence do not require adjudication. 8. In the result, the appeal filed

Colin Mario Rebello, Mumbai vs. ITO., Ward-23(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Supreme court in the case of CIT V. Prannoy Roy 309 ITR 231 (2009). 3. The learned Assessing Officer erred in charging excess interest under section 234A without fully appreciating the facts of the case and considering that the taxes have been paid so no compensatory interest can be charged ... strictly comply with the meaning of advance tax and would therefore, have to be disregarded for the purpose of charging interest under section 234A, was rejected. The Court also held that interest under section 234A was compensatory in nature and unless any loss was caused to the revenue, the same

Goldman Sachs & Co., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Appellant to its Associated Enterprises (AES) in India as reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the AEs in India. 4. In levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to Rs 1,477,076 on the basis that Appellant has filed its return of income after ... market data charges. As a result, ground No. 3 raised in assessee‟s appeal is allowed. 20. Insofar as the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act is concerned, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication

Goldman Sachs & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Appellant to its Associated Enterprises (AES) in India as reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the AEs in India. 4. In levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to Rs 1,477,076 on the basis that Appellant has filed its return of income after ... market data charges. As a result, ground No. 3 raised in assessee‟s appeal is allowed. 20. Insofar as the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act is concerned, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication

Goldman Sachs & Co, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Appellant to its Associated Enterprises (AES) in India as reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the AEs in India. 4. In levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to Rs 1,477,076 on the basis that Appellant has filed its return of income after ... market data charges. As a result, ground No. 3 raised in assessee‟s appeal is allowed. 20. Insofar as the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act is concerned, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication

Goldman Sachs & Company, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Appellant to its Associated Enterprises (AES) in India as reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the AEs in India. 4. In levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to Rs 1,477,076 on the basis that Appellant has filed its return of income after ... market data charges. As a result, ground No. 3 raised in assessee‟s appeal is allowed. 20. Insofar as the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act is concerned, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication