← 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

Sarika Tyagi, Ghazibad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghazaibad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1414/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. The Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In the instant case, the return was filed by the assessee belatedly. Hence interest u/s 234A ... raised by the assessee hereby allowed. 28. The Original Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 29. We have heard the rival submissions . If there is any delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s

Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. The Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In the instant case, the return was filed by the assessee belatedly. Hence interest u/s 234A ... raised by the assessee hereby allowed. 28. The Original Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 29. We have heard the rival submissions . If there is any delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1412/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. The Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In the instant case, the return was filed by the assessee belatedly. Hence interest u/s 234A ... raised by the assessee hereby allowed. 28. The Original Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 29. We have heard the rival submissions . If there is any delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s

DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1387/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. The Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In the instant case, the return was filed by the assessee belatedly. Hence interest u/s 234A ... raised by the assessee hereby allowed. 28. The Original Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 29. We have heard the rival submissions . If there is any delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s

DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Sushil Tyagi, Delhi

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1386/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. The Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In the instant case, the return was filed by the assessee belatedly. Hence interest u/s 234A ... raised by the assessee hereby allowed. 28. The Original Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is challenging the chargeability of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 29. We have heard the rival submissions . If there is any delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s

Shree Swaminarayan Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2 (Exemption), Ahmedabad

ITA 1106/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Shree Swaminarayan Charitable Trust Ito, Ward-2 20, Pushpak Bungalows Vs (Exemption) Nr.Dipak School Ahmedabad. New Nikol, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aafs 8164 H (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Parin Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, SR.DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)Section 234ASection 250

above and in alternative, Ld. NFAC ought to have give direction to compute income on commercial principle and real income theory. Charging of Interest u/s 234A,234B,234C are unjustified.” 3. The issue before me pertains to delayed submission of Form no.10B which ld.counsel for the stated

Shree Ganesh Buildcon, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 220/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishree Ganesh Buildcon, Ito 1(2), 5-A, First Floor, Bhopal Guru Kripa Plaza, 48-A, Zone-I, Vs. M.P. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abwfs0018D Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2024 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 270

u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Penalty proceedings u/s 270 272A (1)(d) and 271AAC are also initiated separately. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C as per rule. Give credit for pre-paid taxes as per proof on record. Issue Demand Notice & Challan.” 6. All these

Vengali Abdul Khader, Pattambi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Vengali Abdul Khader Acit, Central Circle Vilayur West, Poottapalam Aayakr Bahvan, S.T. Nagar Vs. Pattambi 679309 Shaktanthampural Nagar [Pan: Afupa3774J] Thrissur - 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Paulose, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132BSection 139Section 234ASection 234B

assessee on the assessed income, there will be no tax that will be left, in order to be eligible to be charged with interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. We find that the assessee had already made 132(4) disclosure statement before the DDIT(Inv.) vide letter dated ... consent for appropriation of the said seized cash towards the tax liability for the Assessment year 2011-12. We find that the interest u/s 234A of the Act is chargeable only for the period of delay in filing the return of income. The due date of filing return of income

Shah Binit Chandravadan, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1198/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1198/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT

Vinod Sanwaldas Dhingra, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 375/NAG/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Oct 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salonkhe
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A

estimated profit and confirmed the addition. Therefore addition confirmed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 6. The appellant denies liability to be assessed to interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C. Without prejudice the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 7. The appellant seeks permission

Mstc Ltd, Kolkata vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Cir-1(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 623/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Prasun Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 250

Cess @4% on disputed income/addition of Rs. 2,26,77,60,000/-) b. Rs. 1,90,68,525/- on account of Disputed Interest u/s 234A c. Rs 13,34,79,675/-on account of Disputed Interest u/s 234B d. Rs. 3,04,32,052/-on account of Disputed Interest u/s ... facts and circumstances of the case in not passing order of refund for Rs. 144150124 along with interest Charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C and issuance of refund is concerned. they are consequential to the addition made and on the income assessed, therefore not adjudicated here. Ground

Vimla Devi Meena, Dausa vs. ITO Ward- Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1034/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234ASection 250

full. 4. 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

Prabhati Devi, Dausa vs. ITO Ward Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1031/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

full. 3. The Id. 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

Rs.1,24,79,362/-: The ld. CIT(A) further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging of any such interest. The interest so charged, being contrary

Naval Kishore, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that

ITA 205/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)
Section 139Section 143Section 153ASection 234ASection 68

Rs.1,24,79,362/-: The Id. CIT(A) further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging of any such interest. The interest so charged, being contrary

Udai Parnami, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward - 5(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1078/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Or At Lthe Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 56Section 57

Jaipur. 2. CIT (A) has erred in facts and law passing the order without giving opportunity of being heard. 3. Consequential levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B is bad in law. 4. Consequential initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A of Income

Subash Chand, Kaithal vs. Income Tax Officer, Kaithal

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

ITA 401/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pulkit Saini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 234ASection 4

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That the appellant craves leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal

Subhashappa V Mukta, Latur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle - 2, Aurangabad

ITA 60/PUN/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh and Mrs. J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 234ASection 269SSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

u/s.271AAA, the same should be invoked under the respective issue itself as well as at the bottom of the order. h) The Computation interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C will be a part of the assessment order itself. i) Wherever, the A.O. found the provisions of the section 269SS/269T are violated

Shri Binoy Rajen Shah, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 926/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Amit Jhaveri, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

fatal flaw which renders the assessment order a nullity.  ITAT Mumbai, ITO-24(3)(1) V/s Mr. Indravadan Jain (HUF) GOA No. 3 Interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C  The Ld. ITO (NFAC) has levied interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the Income Tax Act 1961 on taxes which has been

Sahab Singh S/O Jaimal Singh, Kaithal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kaithal

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

ITA 279/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 279/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sahab Singh Vs. The Ito, बनाम Ward-2, S/O Jaimal Singh Kaithal Habri Road, Gamri Pundri, Kailthal 136026 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Dbmps6919G अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Pulkit Saini, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2024 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Pulkit Saini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 292B

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds