← 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

DCIT, Circle- 25(1), New Delhi vs. Tepe Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4595/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh K. Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 68

provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and further penalty u/s 271(1) (c) has been imposed and interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C has been charged. The appellant is disputing the said action of the Income Tax Officer. PLEA During the accounting period relevant

Wahid Khan, Bhiwadi vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Alwar /DCIT CPC Bengaluru, Alwar/CPC Bengaluru

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 166/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U

Jocky Camilo Fernandes, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3711/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyaljocky Camilo Fernandes Dd Thakur Wadi, Near Chawl No.03, Agar Bazar, Dadar (W) Mumbai-400 028 Pan: Aadpf5163G ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-18 (2) (4) Mumbai-12 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Vranda U Matkari, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 50CSection 54Section 54F

confirming all above additions. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer erred wrongly charging interest u/s 234A, B, C & D in initiating penalty u/s 274 rws 271(1)(c). The appellant therefore prays follows, 1. To delete the addition ... these 2 grounds become infructuous, hence dismissed without any adjudication. 8. Ground No. 4 is general in nature. Ground no. 5 pertains to interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C. In this regard it is directed that interest u/s. 234C is fastened to the figures of returned income

Pme Power Solutions (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1055/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Kiran Pabuwal, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 176/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 138Section 23Section 234ASection 57Section 69

Kindly delete the addition. 3. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act, 1961 is wrong, unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly delete the same. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing

Amar Dyeing Works (Regd.), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 30(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 1452/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Shrey Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 45(5)(a)

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 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The assessee filed return of income on 27.03.2017 declaring total income of Rs.25,550/- and the same

Cane Development Council Titawi, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), Muzaffarnagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4356/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2014-15
Section 10(20)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 234A

principles of natural justice and the same has been passed without affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard. 10. 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

Dharampal Singh, Neemkathana vs. ITO, Neemkathana

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

ITA 124/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Final Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Shekhawat (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143Section 148

from other sources as discussed above Rs. 4,87,000/- Total income Rs. 4,87,000/- Assessed. Issue Demand Notice and challan. Charge interest u/s 234A & 234B. Initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and there concealed

Swastic Oil Industries, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 35/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234F of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and without any such interest. The interest so charged/withdraw being contrary to the provisions ... further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234F of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and without any such interest. The interest so charged/withdraw being contrary to the provisions

Swastic Oil Industires, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234F of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and without any such interest. The interest so charged/withdraw being contrary to the provisions ... further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234F of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and without any such interest. The interest so charged/withdraw being contrary to the provisions

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7582/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 4. That the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” “1. That there was no justification ... above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 3. That the levy of interest u/s 234A ad 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” ITA No. 7581 /Del/2018 “1. That

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7581/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 4. That the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” “1. That there was no justification ... above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 3. That the levy of interest u/s 234A ad 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” ITA No. 7581 /Del/2018 “1. That

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7580/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 4. That the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” “1. That there was no justification ... above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 3. That the levy of interest u/s 234A ad 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” ITA No. 7581 /Del/2018 “1. That

Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

ITA 7579/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 234A

above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 4. That the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” “1. That there was no justification ... above, the addition out of alleged bogus purchases as sustained/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very excessive. 3. That the levy of interest u/s 234A ad 234B is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, the interest as charged is very excessive.” ITA No. 7581 /Del/2018 “1. That

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vinod Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

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

ITA 6473/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding

Mr. Vinod Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6259/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding

Vinod Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4055/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. S. K. Gupta, New Delhi

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

ITA 3991/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Delhi

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

ITA 3989/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding

S.K. Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3887/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 148Section 292B

with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 is accordingly dismissed. 63. Ground No. 6 relates to the deletion of interest u/s 234A of the Act for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of seized material. 64. An identical issue was considered ... mandatory and consequential to the . appeal effect order. However, in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the interest u/s 234A not to charged for the period upto which the assessee was not provided copy of the seized material and in our humble understanding