← 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

Shri Hariom Jee Rice Mill, Rohtas vs. ACIT, Centralcircle-1, Patna

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 72/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kr. ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 115BSection 127Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234B

arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. 8. For that the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the charging of interest u/s 234A at Rs. 9,14,704/-, u/s 234B at Rs. 3,84,17,568/- and 234C at Rs. 39,447/-. The return has been filed ... u/s 139(1) before due date, hence interest u/s 234A is not applicable. Interest u/s 234B is chargeable on income returned: The learned CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating this ground of appeal. Interest as charged is fit to be deleted. 9. For that the appellant reserves its right

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

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

ITA 2218/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

after a delay of 2 months, declaring the same income as declared in the original return of income. No interest u/s 234A of the Act was charged in the computation of income with regard to delay in filing the return of income. In view of the above observations, ld. PCIT ... filed your ITR on 15.09.2021 after a delay of 2 months, declaring an income of Rs.8,94,302. No interest u/s 234A of I. T. Act has been charged in the computation of income.” The issue of mistake in computing the interest under section 234A can at best be termed

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

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

ITA 2217/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

after a delay of 2 months, declaring the same income as declared in the original return of income. No interest u/s 234A of the Act was charged in the computation of income with regard to delay in filing the return of income. In view of the above observations, ld. PCIT ... filed your ITR on 15.09.2021 after a delay of 2 months, declaring an income of Rs.8,94,302. No interest u/s 234A of I. T. Act has been charged in the computation of income.” The issue of mistake in computing the interest under section 234A can at best be termed

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

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

ITA 2216/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

after a delay of 2 months, declaring the same income as declared in the original return of income. No interest u/s 234A of the Act was charged in the computation of income with regard to delay in filing the return of income. In view of the above observations, ld. PCIT ... filed your ITR on 15.09.2021 after a delay of 2 months, declaring an income of Rs.8,94,302. No interest u/s 234A of I. T. Act has been charged in the computation of income.” The issue of mistake in computing the interest under section 234A can at best be termed

Shri Ikbalbhai Jumabhai Khirani, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-1 (2) (1), Rajkot

ITA 843/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 44A

wrongly confirmed addition of Rs. 1,75,000/- regarding Income from Other Sources. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B,234C and 234D of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed initiation of penalty u/s 270A

Amit Kumar Verma, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6(1), Patna

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

ITA 357/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

principle of natural justice. 6. For that the CIT (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi erred in confirming levy and demand of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C of the act. 7. For that CIT (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). Delhi erred in confirming initiation of penalty proceedings u/s

Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel L/H Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward 5, Navsari

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

ITA 345/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel, Vs. Ito, L/H Of Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel Ward - 5, 16, Shrinikunj Society, Ashabaug, Navsari Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abjpp3114G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Lila Verma, Malakhedi Road vs. ACIT/DCIT Itarsi, Aayakar Bhawan Itarsi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 430/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore04 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2012-13 Lila Verma Acit/Dcit Rewa Bhagwati Nagar

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 234ASection 246ASection 250Section 253

account of unexplained investment in firm M/s Nand Developers. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in maintaining levy of interest u/s 234A of Rs. 1,09,044/-. 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in maintaining levy of interest u/s 2348 of Rs. 16,46,728/-.” 3. Record

Urvashi Girishbhai Lal, Rajkot vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 466/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed initiation of penalty proceedings u/s

Govabhai Lakhabhai Rabari, Anjar vs. Income Tax Officer(ITO), Gandhidham

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

ITA 878/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalepesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 274Section 44A

271F, 272A(1)(d) and 271B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act, 1961. 9. That, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are not justified

Govabhai Lakhabhai Rabari, Anjar vs. Income Tax Officer(ITO), Gandhidham

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

ITA 877/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalepesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 274Section 44A

271F, 272A(1)(d) and 271B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act, 1961. 9. That, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are not justified

Matrix Clothing Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT-CC-18, Delhi

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

ITA 3805/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmatrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Village Mohammadpur, Central Circle-18, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon- Delhi 122 001, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm8475B Assessee By : Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv Shri Himanshu Agarwal, Adv Shri Akash Shukla, Adv Revenue By: Shri Chetan P. S. Rao, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01/12/2025 Matrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Village Mohammadpur, Central Circle-18, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon- Delhi 122 001, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm8475B

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Chetan P. S. Rao, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

other time ITA No. 3805/Del/2024 Matrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd as extended by CBDT from time to time and accordingly decide the chargeability of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 19. The chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature. 20. The chargeability of interest u/s 234D

Matrix Clothing Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi

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

ITA 760/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmatrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Village Mohammadpur, Central Circle-18, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon- Delhi 122 001, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm8475B Assessee By : Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv Shri Himanshu Agarwal, Adv Shri Akash Shukla, Adv Revenue By: Shri Chetan P. S. Rao, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01/12/2025 Matrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Village Mohammadpur, Central Circle-18, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon- Delhi 122 001, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm8475B

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Chetan P. S. Rao, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

other time ITA No. 3805/Del/2024 Matrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd as extended by CBDT from time to time and accordingly decide the chargeability of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 19. The chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature. 20. The chargeability of interest u/s 234D

M/S Parasnath Fuels (P) Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalparasnath Fuels Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle 1(1), 28 Feet Road, Dehradun Vikas Nagar, Vs Dehradun - 248198 Pan-Aaicp2190D Assessee Revenue Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am, This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appellate Centre [Cit(A), In Short], Dated 08.10.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10104734 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dt. 08.10.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Assumption Of Jurisdiction In Initiating The Proceedings U/S 147 & Passing The Impugned Order U/S 147/144B & That Too Without Complying With Mandatory Conditions U/S 147 To 151A Parasnath Fuels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 68

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. 7. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Khadakala Seva Sahkari Manadli Ltd., Rajkot (Amreli) vs. The ITO Ward - 3 (1) (4) Amreli, Amreli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 199/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.199/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2018-19 Khadakala Seva Sahkari Mandali Income Tax Officer Ltd. Ward 3(1)(4), Amreli बनाम/ Savarkundla, Amreli, 364515 Gujarat - 365650 Vs [C/O. D. R. Adhia Om Shri Padamlaya, Near Trikamrayji Haweli, 16- Jagnath Plot, Dr. Yagnik Road, Opp. Imperial Hotel, Rajkot, Gujarat 360001] "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabak3647B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Written Submission राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M:

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 80P

confirming the same. The same needs cancellation 3. The Ld. A.O. erred in law as well as on facts in charging F interest U/s 234A of Rs. 7,532/-. The Ld CIT(A) has also erred in confirming the same. The same needs cancellation 4. The Ld. A.O. erred

Sachinkumar Rajubhai Pranchvani, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat

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

ITA 1355/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Drashit Naik, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 11SSection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 68

Both lower authorities erred in levying tax u/s 115BBE of the Act. 5) The Assessing officer erred in levying interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 6) Without prejudice, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in calculating the tax of the Appellant as per the higher rate

Nilesh Jayantilal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. NFAC, Delhi, Juridis. AO- the ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 908/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD

Nilesh Jayantilal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. NFAC, Delhi, Juridis. AO- the ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 907/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD

Br Nath Pai Shikshan Sanstha, Kudal vs. ITO, Exemption, Exemption Ward

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1785/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1782, 1783 & 1785/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2020-21 To 2022-23 Br Nath Pai Shikshan Vs. Cpc, Bangalore. Sanstha, Plot No.4, Midc, Near Vayman Garden Compound, Sindhudurg- 416520. Appellant Respondent Pan: Aabtb1496N Assessee By : Shri P. P. Jayaraman Revenue By : Smt. N. C. Shilpa Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-6, Kolkata ['Ld. Cit(A)'] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 To 2022-23 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1785/Pun/2025 For A.Y. 2020-21 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri P. P. JayaramanFor Respondent: Smt. N. C. Shilpa
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

against charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. In this regard, it is to be stated that interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C are mandatory in nature and depends on the dates of filing return of income and dates and amounts of prepaid taxes. No factual ... legal issue is involved in the same and their calculation are purely mathematical calculation. The jurisdictional assessing officer is therefore directed to levy interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C as per law. These grounds of appeal are allowed with the above observation. In result, the appeal is partly allowed

Br Nath Pai Shikshan Sanstha, Kudal vs. ITO, Exemption

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1783/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1782, 1783 & 1785/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2020-21 To 2022-23 Br Nath Pai Shikshan | Vs. Cpc, Bangalore. Sanstha, Plot No.4, Midc, Near Vayman Garden Compound, Sindhudurg- 416520. Pan: Aabtb1496N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri P. P. Jayaraman Revenue By : Smt. N. C. Shilpa Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-6, Kolkata ['Ld. Cit(A)'] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 To 2022-23 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1785/Pun/2025 For A.Y. 2020-21 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri P. P. JayaramanFor Respondent: Smt. N. C. Shilpa
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

against charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. In this regard, it is to be stated that interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C are mandatory in nature and depends on the dates of filing return of income and dates and amounts of prepaid taxes. No factual ... legal issue is involved in the same and their calculation are purely mathematical calculation. The jurisdictional assessing officer is therefore directed to levy interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C as per law. These grounds of appeal are allowed with the above observation. In result, the appeal is partly allowed