← 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

Ekta Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Virar vs. Income Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, New Delhi

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 105/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manish Ajudiya (Sr. DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

u/s 80P(2)(d). 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. erred in wrong charging interest u/s 234A, B & C and levying penalty u/s 270A. 13. We find that grounds no.1 and 2 pertain to deductions u/s 80P which has already been

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Span India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 801/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145Section 145(3)

principles of natural justice and the same has been passed without affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard. 12. 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 ... principles of natural justice and the same has been passed without affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard. 13. 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

Aluminium Industries (Assam) Private Limited, Tinsukia vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tinsukia

ITA 187/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. Assessing Officer. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) is seen to have proceeded to confirm the action of the Ld. AO.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69A

Income Tax Rules 1962 at the time of hearing of the appeal. 11) For that the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act, the same was unjustified and hence the same be deleted. 12) The appellant craves leave to produce additional evidences

Aluminium Industries (Assam) Private Limited, Tinsukia vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Tinsukia

ITA 186/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. Assessing Officer. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) is seen to have proceeded to confirm the action of the Ld. AO.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69A

Income Tax Rules 1962 at the time of hearing of the appeal. 11) For that the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act, the same was unjustified and hence the same be deleted. 12) The appellant craves leave to produce additional evidences

Shalini Jagwayan, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 987/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-VH
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 69

full. 3. The ld. AO has grossly erred 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

Asian Paints Employees Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Assiatant Commissioner Ofincome Tax Ward 41(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the orders of the lower authorities are reversed and the learned AO is directed to grant deduction to the assessee on interest income earned from cooperative banks u/s 80 P (2) (d) o...

ITA 300/MUM/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, () & Shri Sandeep Gosain, ()

Section 2Section 234ASection 250Section 80Section 80(2)(d)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

provision of Section 80P (4) are applicable to Co-operative Banks and not to Co-operative societies. 2. Ground No 2 - Levy of Interest u/s 234A and 234B The said A.O. erred in charging excess interest u/s 234A and 234B when no such interest is chargeable. 3. The appellant craves

Navbharat Potteries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2700/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 22Section 23(1)(c)Section 250

notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2021 are bad in law and without jurisdiction. 5. The Ld. AO has erred in levying interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s

Ligi Biju Koddasary, Vapi vs. ITO, Ward-5, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 727/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.727/Srt/2024 (Ay 2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Ligi Biju Koddasary Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, B-302, Sapphire Apartment, Vapi, 8Th Floor Fortune Square बनाम Raveshia Park, Murarji Circle, Ii, Above Tvz. Chala, Vs Gidc, Vapi-396 195 Vapi-396 191 [Pan : Anypk 5855 G] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

justice. 7.Ld.NfAC erred in law and on facts in charging tax at special rate as prescribed u/s 115BBE of the Act. 8.Charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C & 234D are unjustified. 9. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is unjustified.” 2. Rival submissions of the parties have been

Cupid Biotech Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1746/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President)

Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 271

facts in passing orders without providing statements of the persons relied on and consequential cross examination. 7. Charging of Interest u/s 234A,234B,234C & 234D are unjustified. 8. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) is unjustifled. 3. On going through the record, I find that notices u/s.250 were

K S Binani HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(2) 1), Mumbai

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

ITA 269/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Renu Jauhri ()

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 234Section 234ASection 271(1)Section 271ASection 68

referring the matter to VU/TU 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in charging interest u/s 234A, B and C and also initiating penalty u/s 271AAC. 4) In the facts and the circumstances of law, the Ld Commissioner of Income

Income Tax Department, Mumbai vs. Perry Impex, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6984/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this case.The ground is accordingly dismissed. 12. In the last ground it is stated that, the Ld. 6 CIT(A) erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act.This ground being consequential, does not require any adjudication. The AO would consider the provisions, if applicable, while giving effect

ACIT-19(1), Mumbai vs. Perry Impex, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6983/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this case.The ground is accordingly dismissed. 12. In the last ground it is stated that, the Ld. 6 CIT(A) erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act.This ground being consequential, does not require any adjudication. The AO would consider the provisions, if applicable, while giving effect

Perry Impex, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6800/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this case.The ground is accordingly dismissed. 12. In the last ground it is stated that, the Ld. 6 CIT(A) erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act.This ground being consequential, does not require any adjudication. The AO would consider the provisions, if applicable, while giving effect

Perry Impex, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6799/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this case.The ground is accordingly dismissed. 12. In the last ground it is stated that, the Ld. 6 CIT(A) erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act.This ground being consequential, does not require any adjudication. The AO would consider the provisions, if applicable, while giving effect

DCIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad Through L/H Shri Dilnawaz & Mrs. Mehrunissa, Muzaffarnagar

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA 3555/Del/2017 is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue in ITA 3754/Del/2017 is also partly allowed

ITA 3754/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14 Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Through Legal Heir Shri Dilnawaz Income Tax, Circle-1, (Son) & Mrs. Mehrunissa (Spouse) Muzaffarnagar. 800/1, Yogendrapuri, Muzaffarnagar Pan- Ahrpd 5860 D Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Vs Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad, Commissioner Of Through Legal Heir Shri Dilnawaz (Son) Income Tax, Circle-1 & Mrs. Mehrunissa (Spouse) Muzaffarnagar. 800/1, Yogendrapuri, Muzaffarnagar Pan- Ahrpd 5860 D Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)

principles of natural justice and the same has been passed without affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard. 13. That the interest U/s 234A & 2348 has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included the same ... u/s 23(1) is restricted to Rs 3000/- per month. Ground no 2 of Revenue is decided accordingly. 22. Ground no 13 regarding interest u/s 234A and 234B is consequential in nature. Page 14 of 16 ITA nos. 3555 & 3754/Del/2017 Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad V ACIT Muzaffarnagar

Takali Janseva Nagri Sahkari Pat Sanstha Limited, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 616/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 234ASection 56Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

respect of interest of Rs.48,77,959 under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. The learned AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C. Without prejudice, interest levied is excessive. 5. The assessee craves leave to add, alter or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal ... confirmed. 6. The ground no. 5 of the appellant is with respected levy of interest u/s. 234A, 234B, & 234C which is mandatory as per the provisions of the IT Act. However, AO is directed to verify the same once again and mandatory levy may be made. Hence, this ground

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6990/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025
Section 143(1)

claimed in return of income Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Capital Enterprises Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 6990 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6989/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025
Section 143(1)

claimed in return of income Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Capital Enterprises Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 6990 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 2. The AO erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B

Esm Group Inc, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(2)(2), International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 9365/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra[A.Y 2008-09] M/S Esm Group Inc. Vs. The Dy.C.I.T Suite 118 N, 300, Corporate Park Circle -1(2)(2) Way Amherst, New York International Taxation New Delhi Pan: Aacce 4072 H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri Sudhir Kumar Dash, Ca Department By :Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Kumar Dash, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Chandra Kanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 9(1)(vii)

with the supply of equipment and cannot be termed as FTS in view of Article 12(5) of the DTAA. 4. Prepaid Taxes, Interest u/s 234A, 234B& 234C a) The Ld AO has applied interest under 234B& 234C without giving credit of the prepaid taxes and credit of tax deducted ... appeal of the assessee on identical issues following the decision of ITAT for the AY 2011-12. 20. Grounds regarding Prepaid Taxes, Interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C are consequential in nature. 21. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 9365/DEL/2019is allowed. The order is pronounced

Ekta Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Virar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(5)/Thane, Thane

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

judgments cited before him. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. erred in wrong charging interest u/s 234A, B & C and levying penalty u/s 270A. [B] Relief Prayed: The appellant therefore prays Your Honour; 1) To allow the deduction ... claimed u/s 80P(2)(d). 2) To delete the interest u/s 234A, B & C and penalty u/s 270A. [C] General:- • The appellant reserves rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. • This appeal is filed late and the delay may please be condoned