interest u/s 234A — 1,483 case laws

Prem Chand Gupta, Alwar vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Alwar

16. For the foregoing discussion and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 1251/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

assessment was being framed as regards income of Rs. 53,25,850/- and agriculture income of Rs. 1,75,000/- . In addition thereto, interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act was also ordered to be charged. Tax was accordingly calculated. At the same time, penalty proceedings u/s

Jsw Minerals Trading Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6137/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms.Deepa Khare,ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, (CIT DR)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234B

section 115BAA. (iii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ldClT(A) erred in confirming charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C and raising a demand of Rs.12,02,73,660. The demand and interest u/s 234B and 234C be cancelled. 3. The main

Sarvajanik Seva Trust, Mumbai vs. Dy Comm of Income Tax-26(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee Trust is allowed

ITA 1948/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 115TSection 12ASection 250

benefit of marginal relief under the Act. Cess was calculated at 4% amounting to Rs.52,838/-. Credit for taxes paid was claimed, interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C was levied and net tax payable was arrived at Rs.4,94,746/-. Self-assessment tax of Rs.7,35,000/- was paid

Sarvajanik Seva Trust, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-26(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee Trust is allowed

ITA 1947/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 115TSection 12ASection 250

benefit of marginal relief under the Act. Cess was calculated at 4% amounting to Rs.52,838/-. Credit for taxes paid was claimed, interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C was levied and net tax payable was arrived at Rs.4,94,746/-. Self-assessment tax of Rs.7,35,000/- was paid

Nitin Traders, Khamgaon vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - Akola, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 234A

justified in passing an order in breach of principle of natural justice. 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified sustaining charge of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the IT Act 1961. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify and withdraw any grounds before or during

M/S. V.N. Exports, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 817/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Tosifbhai Tajdin Halani, Anand vs. The Dy.CIT, Anand Circle, Anand

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

ITA 1205/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 56Section 69ASection 69C

Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A is unjustified. 12. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC is unjustified. 13 Charging of Interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C are unjustified. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that one more opportunity be given to the assessee, so as to file necessary details before

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4658/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S RELIEF U/S 89(1) U/S 90 / U/S 0 91 44. NET TAX NET TAX 91,18,215 91,18,215 45. INTEREST U/S 234A INTEREST U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4608/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S RELIEF U/S 89(1) U/S 90 / U/S 0 91 44. NET TAX NET TAX 91,18,215 91,18,215 45. INTEREST U/S 234A INTEREST U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4606/MUM/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S RELIEF U/S 89(1) U/S 90 / U/S 0 91 44. NET TAX NET TAX 91,18,215 91,18,215 45. INTEREST U/S 234A INTEREST U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST

Adidarshan Tradewing Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1716/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 250(6)Section 263Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the actions of the Ld. Assessing Officer in charging interest u/s 234A and u/s 234B. which is without proper basis, reason or justification. 5. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant craves leave

Avinash Dadhich, Pal Road vs. ACIT, Circle(Intl. Tax), Jaipur

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

ITA 824/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.824/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Avinash Dadhich A-191 Mansarovar Scheme Pal Road, Jodhpur. बनाम The ACIT, Circle, International Taxation, Jaipur. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.:BIFPD2373H निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) (Th. V.C.) राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Shri Anup Singh(Addl.CIT) सुनवाई की

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh(Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

addition of Rs. 52,38,810/- is hereby upheld. Hence, ground no. 1 is dismissed. 10. Ground no. 2 is against levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the I.T. Act. Charging of interest is mandatory, consequential and automatic in nature. The AO does not have discretion in these

Subhash Chand, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward- 2(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 989/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] V.V. Transport, Vs Acit, 96-A, Sindhu Bhawan, Rohtak Subhash Nagar, Rohtak, Haryana-124001. Pan-Aadfv5250G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Sakshi Pandey, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.08.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.01.20248 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-7, Kolkata [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No.Cit(A), Rohtak/10584/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 20.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm, Engaged In The Business Of Running Of Petrol Pump. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Appeal Was Filed On 28.10.2017, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 4,29,25,730/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny For The Reasons Of Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period & Notice U/S 143(2) Was Issued On 24.09.2018. After Considering The Submissions & The Books Of Accounts Submitted, The Ao Had Taken No Adverse Inference On The Issue Of Cash Deposited During Demonetization Period However, He Has Made Disallowance Of Inr 12,20,700/- By Holding That The Assessee Has Made Interest Free Advances To Staff & To One Of The Partners Whereas It Is Paying Interest On The Borrowings. In First Appeal, Ld.Cit(A) Has Deleted The Disallowance Made Out Of The Interest Payments Towards The Staff Advances Given However, Confirmed The Disallowance On Account Of Advances Given To The Partner Of Inr 1 Crore.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36

ITA No.989/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Baldev Singh, Fatehabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Wards 1, Fatehbad

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 813/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yaday & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 813/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Baldev Singh, Vs. The Ito, बनाम M/S Baldev Singh Jarnail Ward-1, Singh, Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad Dharsul Kalan, Tehsil Tohana, Fatehabad

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate and Shri Ashok Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148Section 249Section 250Section 253Section 3Section 5

initiation the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) of the Act. We find that charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is consequential to the additions made to the income of the Assessee which is yet to be decided. 11. As far as initiation of penalty