← 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

Tejprakash Bahnwar Lal Mehta, Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(4) Udaipur, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 15/JODH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. Nos. 13 To 14/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Preeti Naveen Mehta, 118, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hotel, Aashish Palace Ki Gali Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Aixpm5948A] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. Nos. 15 To 16/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Tej Prakash Bahnwar Lal Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mehta, 118, Hotel, Aashish Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Palace Ki Gali Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Agnpm0758N] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15 .12.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 68

full. 4. Ground4. The Id. AC) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A ,B,C. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions

Preeti Naveen Mehta, Udaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(4) Udaipur, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 14/JODH/2022[2021-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur15 Dec 2023AY 2021-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. Nos. 13 To 14/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Preeti Naveen Mehta, 118, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hotel, Aashish Palace Ki Gali Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Aixpm5948A] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. Nos. 15 To 16/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Tej Prakash Bahnwar Lal Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mehta, 118, Hotel, Aashish Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Palace Ki Gali Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Agnpm0758N] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15 .12.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 68

full. 4. Ground4. The Id. AC) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A ,B,C. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions

Preeti Naveen Mehta, Udaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(4) Udaipur, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 13/JODH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. Nos. 13 To 14/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Preeti Naveen Mehta, 118, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hotel, Aashish Palace Ki Gali Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Aixpm5948A] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. Nos. 15 To 16/Jodh/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2012-13 Tej Prakash Bahnwar Lal Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mehta, 118, Hotel, Aashish Ward-1(4), Udaipur. Palace Ki Gali Chetak Marg, Udaipur, Raj. [Pan: Agnpm0758N] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15 .12.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 68

full. 4. Ground4. The Id. AC) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A ,B,C. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Usha Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3862/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3860/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3859/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3858/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3831/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Satya Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3826/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 3. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 3. Since, the Department has filed above captioned appeals against the Orders

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Ltd., Raipur

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

ITA 3/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)

income at Rs. 67,38,09,917/-. Prepaid taxes as per 26AS and e- TDS database has been given after verification. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D as applicable. Issue demand notice/Challan accordingly.” CO Nos. 19 & 20/RPR/2023 Based on the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Ltd., Raipur

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

ITA 2/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)

income at Rs. 67,38,09,917/-. Prepaid taxes as per 26AS and e- TDS database has been given after verification. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D as applicable. Issue demand notice/Challan accordingly.” CO Nos. 19 & 20/RPR/2023 Based on the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that

Shailaja Lalit Kotian, Mumbai vs. Central Processing Centrem Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2960/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2960/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shailaja Lalit Kotian बिधम/ Central Processing B/25, 6Th Floor, Namaskar Center, Income Tax Vs. Maas Chs, Poonam Nagar, Department, Bengalure Mumbai-400093. Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E) Room No.615, Mumbai-400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agipk3192M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri Sujit Kotian/Shri Ali Sayyed Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 29.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellate Order Dated 29.06.2023 [‘The Impugned Order’] Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [‘The Hon'Ble Cit(A)’] Is Based Upon Conjectures, Surmises & Assuming Incorrect Facts & Therefore, Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri SujitFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 234A

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act.” 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in business of providing International Freight Broking Service through ... note that the assessee by raising ground no. 5 has assailed the action of the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. So need to be adjudicated. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Gagjibhai Jivabhai Bharwad, Surat vs. ITO, Adajan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Surat13 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.466/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Gagjibhai Jivabhai Bharwad Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, 452.453 Avadh Vice-Roy Bardoli Vs. Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat- 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajypb 8766 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

confirming addition u/s 69 of Income Tax Act, 1961 as unexplained investment. 2. That, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That, the findings of the learned CIT(A) are not justified and required

Sh. Harjeet Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2354/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 7. That the Ld. AO has erred in law in charging of interest u/s 234A & 234B of the IT Act. 8. That the appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, alter amend, vary, modify and/or

Shri Sanjay Dubey, Bhopal vs. The ITO 1 (2), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of assesse in ITANo

ITA 141/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: PendingITAT Indore07 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 50C

That the learned lower authority has erred in rectifying his own order during the pendency of the appeal by increasing the demand of interest u/s 234A at Rs.53,8310/- which is upheld by the Ld. CIT (Appeal) is arbitrary erroneous and unjustified.” 8. The only issue raised by the assesse ... this appeal is against the increase in demand of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 9. I have considered the rival submission as well as relevant material on record. Since the interest u/s 234A is mandatory and consequential to Page 5 of 6 ITA No.141& 142/Ind/2023 Sanjay Dubey Page

Shri Sanjay Dubey, Bhopal vs. The ITO 1 (2), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of assesse in ITANo

ITA 140/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: PendingITAT Indore07 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 50C

That the learned lower authority has erred in rectifying his own order during the pendency of the appeal by increasing the demand of interest u/s 234A at Rs.53,8310/- which is upheld by the Ld. CIT (Appeal) is arbitrary erroneous and unjustified.” 8. The only issue raised by the assesse ... this appeal is against the increase in demand of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 9. I have considered the rival submission as well as relevant material on record. Since the interest u/s 234A is mandatory and consequential to Page 5 of 6 ITA No.141& 142/Ind/2023 Sanjay Dubey Page

M/S. Rana Bar P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 2690/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 68Section 801CSection 80I

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, 234C & 234D has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the disallowances/additions made and could not have included

Anurag Gupta, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT (Int. Tax), Noida

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

ITA 336/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadi.T.A No.336/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Anurag Gupta Dcit(Int. Tax) Lower Bazar Modi Nagar, Vs. Noida. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aimpg4585A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 1Section 115CSection 115GSection 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. DDIT/ADIT has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Bhawani Devi, Alwar vs. ITO, Ward- Bhiwadi, Alwar

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

ITA 624/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CITa
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 244ASection 69B

deleted in full. 4. The ld. AO further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act and as also in withdrawing interest u/s 244A of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging

Nahta Trading Co., Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

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

ITA 449/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya (Adv. )For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 234A

full. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as in facts of the case in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C. The levy interest being charged, is contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 4. the appellant prays