← 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

Avanti Resources Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12 (1) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2930/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234ASection 254Section 271(1)(c)

discussed. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. 6: Initiation of penalty and charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D: age |8 ITA Nos. 2930 to 2932/Mum/2023 Avanti Resources Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward ... find that ground of appeal challenging the initiating of penalty is premature at this stage and charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D is consequential and mandatory, therefore, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. ITA No. 2931/Mum/2023 Ground No. 1 & 2: 18. Since we have

Sulakshana, Punhana vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurgaon

ITA 219/DEL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

short ‘the Act’] beyond four years by the Assessing Officer, quantum of addition upheld by the CIT(A) and charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act were also challenged. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the original assessment of the appellant-assessee was completed u/s

Dinesh Gupta, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(1) Noida, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2554/DEL/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Madhav Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 48Section 50C

illegal and bad in law. 8. That the Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The only issue in the present appeal relates to the addition

Brij Bhushan Gupta, Haryana vs. DCIT, Int. Taxation, Gurgoan

In the result, the issue stands remitted to the file of the AO for

ITA 2218/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Sabarwal, Adv. and Shri Rajan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 120Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

illegal as being perverse to the law and to the facts of the case, therefore, not tenable. 6. That charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the penalty initiated in Para 9 of the assessment on the alleged dual charge of presumption

Arihant (Sra) Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(6) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand

ITA 4775/MUM/2023[A. Y. 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Arvind Wadke, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 80P(2)(d)

related to disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Grounds No. 6 & 7 are against the charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. 4. Brief facts of the case are as under: a. The assessee is a co-operative housing society and return

Arihant (Sra) Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(6), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand

ITA 4774/MUM/2023[A Y 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhari

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Arvind Wadke, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 80P(2)(d)

related to disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Grounds No. 6 & 7 are against the charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. 4. Brief facts of the case are as under: a. The assessee is a co-operative housing society and return

World of Shalom Restaurant Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. The Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 1123/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royworld Of Shalon Restaurants Vs. Ito, Pvt. Ltd, Ward-13(3), N-18, 1St Floor, N. Block Market, Delhi Greater Kailash, Part-1, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcj0174C

For Appellant: Shri Yudhisthir Mehtani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Koatch, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

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 and 234C of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Priyanka Surana, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 102/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

full. 4. 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 provisions of law and on facts of the case and hence same may kindly

ACIT, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad vs. Venkata Praneeth Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 339/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 279/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Praneeth Vs. Acit Developers (P) Ltd, Central Circle 3(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 339/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Vs. Venkata Praneeth Central Circle 3(3) Developers (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/05/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

books of account of the assessee company. Thus, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act. Interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C was also charged as per the provisions of law as well as penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB of the I.T. Act. Thus

Venkata Praneeth Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 279/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 279/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Praneeth Vs. Acit Developers (P) Ltd, Central Circle 3(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 339/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Vs. Venkata Praneeth Central Circle 3(3) Developers (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/05/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

books of account of the assessee company. Thus, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act. Interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C was also charged as per the provisions of law as well as penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB of the I.T. Act. Thus

Kartar Singh, Bhiwadi, Alwar vs. ITO Ward-Bhiwadi, Bhiwadi, Alwar

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 198/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 50C

full. 4. Rs. 22,259,542/- The Id. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary

Smt. Jagdeep Kaur, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward 6(4), Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 81/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048105767(1) Dt. 20/12/2022 Which Was Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Said First Appeal Was Dismissed By The Ld. Cit(A). Therefore Assessee Is Before Us. The Said Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Hereinafter Referred To As The “Impugned Order”. 4. In Form No. 36 The Assessee Interalia Has Take Up Following Grounds Of Appeal Against The Impugned Order Which Are Reproduced Below:

For Appellant: Smt. Supriya, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253

u/s 68 Rs. 7,35,000/- Assessed Income Rs. 7,35,000/- Assessed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the IT Act, 1961. Charge Interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the IT Act, 1961 accordingly. 15. The copy of order of AO passed under section 147 r.w.s

Radha Sharan Goswami, Bhopal vs. DDIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/IND/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniradha Sharan Goswami Ddit, Cpc B-18, Industrial Area Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adzpg1806E Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2024

Section 143(1)Section 154

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

JCIT(OSD), Central Circle-3(4), Chennai vs. Late Shri Venkataram Raddy Bezawada Rep by L/H Smt. B. Kamakshi (Wife )& Others, Nellore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 36/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

JCIT(OSD), Central Circle-3(4), Chennai vs. Late Shri Venkataram Raddy Bezawada Rep by L/H Smt. B. Kamakshi (Wife )& Others, Nellore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 35/CHNY/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

JCIT(OSD), Central Circle-3(4), Chennai vs. Late Shri Venkataram Raddy Bezawada Rep by L/H Smt. B. Kamakshi (Wife )& Others, Nellore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 34/CHNY/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

Late Mr.Bezwada Venkatram Reddy (Rep by Legal Heir Smt.B.Kamakshi), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 955/CHNY/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

Late Mr.Bezwada Venkatram Reddy (Rep by Legal Heir Smt.B.Kamakshi), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 954/CHNY/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

Late Mr.Bezwada Venkatram Reddy (Rep by Legal Heir Smt.B.Kamakshi), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 953/CHNY/2022[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

Late Mr.Bezwada Venkatram Reddy (Rep by Legal Heir Smt.B.Kamakshi), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 952/CHNY/2022[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred