← All Phrases

“interest u/s 234A”

InterestSection 234ASection 234A1,483 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest u/s 234A is CIT v. Ranchi Club Ltd. (247 ITR 209), cited in 21 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest u/s 234A

CIT v. Ranchi Club Ltd.
247 ITR 209 · 2001 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

Interest under sections 234A and 234B cannot be levied mechanically when there is a reasonable cause for delay in payment or response to notices.

ACIT v. Hans Raj Gandhi
37 ITR 418 · Reported
14
citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to the adjustment of seized cash against their advance tax liability. Consequently, no interest under sections 234A or 234B can be charged if the department fails to respond to the assessee's request for such an adjustment.

Judgments citing interest u/s 234A

Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7004/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.2228 & 2229/Del/2018 & 7004 & 7005/Del/2019 [Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 & 2014-15 & 2015-16] Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, Vs Acit, C/O-Rra Tazindia, D-28, Central Circle-20, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049. Pan-Aabpi4222R Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2025

Section 1Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(1)(vii)

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2229/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.2228 & 2229/Del/2018 & 7004 & 7005/Del/2019 [Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 & 2014-15 & 2015-16] Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, Vs Acit, C/O-Rra Tazindia, D-28, Central Circle-20, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049. Pan-Aabpi4222R Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2025

Section 1Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(1)(vii)

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2228/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.2228 & 2229/Del/2018 & 7004 & 7005/Del/2019 [Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 & 2014-15 & 2015-16] Kaajal Aijaz Ilmi, Vs Acit, C/O-Rra Tazindia, D-28, Central Circle-20, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049. Pan-Aabpi4222R Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2025

Section 1Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(1)(vii)

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Anil Kumar, Etah vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(1), Etah

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

ITA 262/AGR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234A

merely based on presumption, assumption and surmises basis. 11. That the learned Authorities has erred in law and on facts in wrongly charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C. 12. That the order is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 13. That any other relief

Yogesh Hargovindbhai Joshi L/H of Bhavnaben Y. Joshi, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 520/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Vice- & Ms.Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Yogesh Hargovindbhai Joshi Vs. The Ito, Ward-6(1)(1) L/H. Of Bhavnaben Y. Joshi Ahmedabad. 8, Manav Pursusharth Society Opp: Hirabhai Tower Uttamnagar, Maninagar Pan : Adupj 2208 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parin Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 129Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

Assessing Officer may be directed to delete the same. 3. The Assessing officer has erred on facts and in law charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C when no such interest is leviable. The appellant denies its liability to pay interest. 4. The assessee has filed return of income under section

Dhruv Narayan Singh, Bhopal vs. ITO-2(3), Bhopal

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

ITA 751/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshidhruv Narayan Singh, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ E-2/192 Arera Colony, 2(3), Vs. Bhopal Bhopal (Pan: Aprps4102H) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 153CSection 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 246ASection 250Section 253

computation of tax and interest a demand notice was issued at Rs.9,03,670/- and hence there was a need to recompute tax interest u/s 234A & 234B. The aforesaid is hereinafter referred to as “impugned rectification order”. 2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid “impugned rectification order” prefers ... While making computation of tax and interest demand notice was issued by the AO at Rs.9,03,670/- in which tax, interest U/s 234A and 234B were calculated at Rs.6,83,006/-, Rs.31,640/- and Rs.3,68,081/-respectively. Whereas actual tax, interest U/s 234A and interest U/s.234B

Shree Jee Timbers, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 679/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 679/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2022-23 M/s. Shree Jee Timbers B-33, Opposite 200 Ft. Bypass, Ayodhya Nagar, Chitrakoot, Jaipur – 302 021 बनाम The ITO Ward-1 (1) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACQFS 6816 C अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby :ShriShrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT

For Appellant: ShriShrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

deleted in full. 5. The Id. AO has grosslyerred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging the interest u/s 234A, B.C. The interest so charged is being totally contrary to the provision of law and on facts of the case and hence same

Fresenius Kabi Oncology Limited, West Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax/ National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Fresenius Kabi Oncology Vs. Dcit/ National Faceless Limited B-310 Somdatt Assessment Centre Chambers I R K Puram New Delhi (Main) South West Delhi 110006 Pan No. Aabcd7720L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocate Ms. Aakriti Bansal, Ca Respondent By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 Order Per Sudhir Kumar: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-26 New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 12.11.2024 Pertaining To A.Y. 2012-13 Confirming The Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (In Short ‘The Act’).

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

book profit is more than tax under normal provision, therefore charge tax at book profit of Rs. 71,57,92,161/-. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234 B & 234C. Issue penalty under section 271(1)(c ) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars.” 7. At the time of passing order under

Arunima Adcon Sevices (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward -3(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 5444/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 56Section 68Section 73A

facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and on the facts in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C, more so when such interest could not be levied under the law. 12. The appellant reserved the right to add, delete

Bigstar Hotels Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 5(1), New Delhi

ITA 3351/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 250

ITA No.3351/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI "A" BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Bhavesh Ishwarlal Panchasara, Rajkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot

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

ITA 95/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.95/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Bhavesh Ishwarlal बनाम Assistant Commissioner Of Panchasara Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Rajkot /Vs. 1, Mehulnagar Main Road, Near Khodiyar Temple, Rajkot-360 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aodpp 1375 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nimish Vayawala, Ld.A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) ha wrongly confirmed levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of I.T. Act, 1961. 5. That the findings of the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) are not justified

Nanha S/O Sh. Dewa Singh, Jind vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jind

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes

ITA 1198/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1198/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Nanha S/O Sh. Dewa Singh, The Ito, बनाम C/O Navdeep Monga,Advocate, Ward-2, House No. 38, Ist Floor, Jind Vs. Bank Colony, Manimajra, U.T., Chandigarh 160101 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Apupn5818A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing )

For Appellant: Sh.Navdeep Monga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 234A

That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in upholding the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. That the appellant seeks permission to add/amend any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and further

U.N. Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1788/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 40

confirming disallowance of Rs. 80,00,000/- made invoking section 40(b) of the Act ignoring submissions and documentary evidences. 3. Charging of Interest u/s 234A,234B,234C & 234D are unjustified. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A is unjustified.” 3. The solitary issue in the present appeal relates

Satbichar Distributors Private Limited, Kanpur vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 448/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250

order ignoring the fact that Ld. A.O./Assessment Unit, NFAC has erred in law and on the facts of the ease by levying interest u/s 234A of the Act despite the return being filed within the stipulated time as per order in Re: Cognizance For Extension of Limitation, Suo Motu

Girdhari Jaisinghani, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 973/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Lekh Mehta, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 55(2)(aa)Section 55(2)(ac)

intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. It is the say of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act is appealable and the ld. CIT(A) ought to have adjudicated the I.T.A. No. 973/Mum/2025 5 same and once ... quarrel as nothing has been decided against the assessee in the intimation framed u/s 143(1) of the Act. However, levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act was challenged and in the considered opinion of this Bench, the same should have been adjudicated

Cane Development Council Mansoorpur, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Ward- 2(5), Muzaffarnagar

In the result, appeals of assessees in ITA Nos 1783/DEL/2012,

ITA 4076/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234A

record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 9. That the interest U/s 234A & 234B has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included the same ... record have not been properly considered and /DEL/2018 Cane Development Council judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. Interest u/s 234A & 234B of the Act has been wrongly and illegally charged as the assessee appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could

Cane Development Council Mansoorpur, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Ward- Exemption, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeals of assessees in ITA Nos 1783/DEL/2012,

ITA 2617/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234A

record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 9. That the interest U/s 234A & 234B has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included the same ... record have not been properly considered and /DEL/2018 Cane Development Council judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. Interest u/s 234A & 234B of the Act has been wrongly and illegally charged as the assessee appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could

Cane Development Council, Mansoorpur, Uttar Pradesh vs. JCIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, appeals of assessees in ITA Nos 1783/DEL/2012,

ITA 1885/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234A

record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 9. That the interest U/s 234A & 234B has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included the same ... record have not been properly considered and /DEL/2018 Cane Development Council judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. Interest u/s 234A & 234B of the Act has been wrongly and illegally charged as the assessee appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could

Cane Development Council, Mansoorpur, Uttar Pradesh vs. Addl. CIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, appeals of assessees in ITA Nos 1783/DEL/2012,

ITA 1783/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234A

record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 9. That the interest U/s 234A & 234B has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included the same ... record have not been properly considered and /DEL/2018 Cane Development Council judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. Interest u/s 234A & 234B of the Act has been wrongly and illegally charged as the assessee appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could

Rafikbhai Ajijbhai Virani, Jamnagar vs. The Assessement Unit NFAC Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 141/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 141/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Rafikbhai Ajijbhai Virani बनाम The Assessment Unit, National Steet No.2, Near Navnala, Faceless Assessment Center, Income /Vs. Gulabnagar Tari Hanuman Tax Department Road, Jamnagar-361007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ascpv 1519 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sankar Bakshi, A.R. राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Order (Ay) 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”, Dated 18.06.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Act Dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 2. “Reopening U/S 148A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) 1. The Learned The National Faceless Appeal Centre [“The Cit(A)”] & The Assessment Unti, Income Tax Department (“The Ao”) Erred In Fact & In Law In Initiating Proceedings U/S 148 Of The Act Without Issuing Notice U/S Ita No. 141/Rjt/2025 A.Y.17-18 Rafikbhai A Virani

For Appellant: Shri Sankar Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A

penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act. 9. The learned CIT(A) and the AO erred in fact and in law in levying interest u/s 234A of the Act. 10. The learned CIT(A) and the AO erred in fact and in law in levying interest u/s 234B