← 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

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4559/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Reassessment; ii) Existence of Permanent Establishment [PE]; iii) Attribution of profit; and iv) Other common grievance relates to th charging of interest u/s 234A, B, C, D, 244A and initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Vide application dated 16.12.2021, the assessee raised an additional ground

Arun Kapoor, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 36(5), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 731/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 274Section 4Section 68Section 80U

r.w.s. 271 (1)(c) of the Act. 7. The learned CIT (A) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act, by completely failing to appreciate that on the facts and circumstances of the case, no such interest

Senator Travels Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Itd, CPC, Bengalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 327/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Senator Travels Pvt.Ltd., Vs Itd, 2K, Dcm Building, 16, Cpc, Barakhamba Road, Bengalore. New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aabcs2702B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2022

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

deleted. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, CPC has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete

M/S Orkla Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It) Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 193/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Orkla Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., The Deputy C/O Mtr Foods Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 1, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Income Tax (It), 100 Feet Inner Ring Road, Asmnt, Circle – 2(1), Ejipura, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 047. Pan: Aabco4087B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-12-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Final Assessment Order Dated 17/12/2018 Passed U/S. 143 (3) By The Ld.Dcit, Asmnt, Circle-2(1), Bangalore For Assessment Year 2015-16 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 1. Barred By Limitation The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer ('Learned Ao') Is Barred By Limitation In View Of The Express Provisions Of Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') Wherein, The Order Should Be Passed Within One Month From The End Of The Month In Which Dispute

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate
Section 143Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 9(1)(vii)

upheld. I agree with the decision of the Hon'ble DRP and the same may be upheld. (9) Levy of Interest u/s 234A, 234B of the Act and levy of education cess. Submission: Charging of interest u/s 234A and 2346 are consequential in nature and they are automatic and they

Bizviz Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 587/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sharwan Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Capt.Pradeep Shoury Arya, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

ld.AO has grossly erred in law as well as on the 2 M/s.Bizviz Technologies Limited. 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

Pearls News Network Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3715/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-13 Pearls News Network Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 705, 7Th Floor, Manjusha Building, Circle-19(2), Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaecp3680L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Anil Gandhi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14Th July, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-31, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing. No Application Seeking Adjournment Of The Appeal Has Been Filed. A Perusal Of The Order Sheet Entries Shows That Although The Case Was Fixed For Hearing On Various Dates, No One Was Appearing. Further, The Notices Sent By Rpad Were Returned By The Postal Authorities With The Remark ‘Left.’ The Assessee Has Also Not Taken Any Step To Intimate The Change Of Address, If Any. Further, The Notice Was Directed To Be Served By The Revenue & The Departmental Notice Server Who Was Deputed To Serve The Dasti Summons Has Reported That The Premise Of The Assessee Was Closed & No One Was Residing There For Which The Notice Was Fixed At The Gate Of The Assessee Company. The Report Of The Notice Server Is Also Placed On Record. Under These Circumstances, We Deem It Proper To Decide The Appeal On The Basis Of The Material Available & After Hearing The Ld. Dr.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gandhi, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 30Section 37(1)Section 68

directions to the Ld. AO for allowance of brought forwarded assessed business loss & unabsorbed depreciation in a time bound period. 6. Levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B for the additions sustained by Id CIT(A) is not justified and fair on the facts and in the circumstances

Srinivas Achar Mohankumar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(4), Bengaluru

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

ITA 568/BANG/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2021AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Mahesh Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh K, Joint CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

paid before the due date of filing the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. 4. The ld.Assessing Officer has erred in levying interest u/s 234A, 234B and section 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 \ 5. That the appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify, substitute

Webtech Engineering P. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ITO, TDS, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as defective

ITA 689/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri R.K.Panda

Section 234A

circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the Ld. AO charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, amend, modify, delete any of the grounds

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. C S Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2894/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 7. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 6. ITA No. 2894/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06 is filed ... under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 10. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and hence ought to be deleted.” 8. The ld ACIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi is filed ITA NO. 2882/Del/2015

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Karat 87 Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2885/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 7. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 6. ITA No. 2894/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06 is filed ... under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 10. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and hence ought to be deleted.” 8. The ld ACIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi is filed ITA NO. 2882/Del/2015

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sbp 87 Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2882/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 7. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 6. ITA No. 2894/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06 is filed ... under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 10. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and hence ought to be deleted.” 8. The ld ACIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi is filed ITA NO. 2882/Del/2015

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Karat 87 Inn Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the ld AO are dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 2880/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Cs Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-07, Room No. R/O. A-1, Cc Colony, Opp. 330, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Rana Pratap Bagh, New Extension, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaefc9884A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153CSection 234B

under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 7. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted.” 6. ITA No. 2894/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06 is filed ... under consideration was ever served upon the assessee and, therefore, the consequential assessment order is illegal and void. 10. That the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and hence ought to be deleted.” 8. The ld ACIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi is filed ITA NO. 2882/Del/2015

ACIT(E), Circle- 2(1), New Delhi vs. National Council for Hotel Management & Catering Technology, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6811/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2012-13 Acit(E), Vs National Council Of Hotel Circle-2(1), New Delhi Management & Catering Technology, A-34, Sector-62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aaatn4791M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Gaurav Pundir, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. K.P.Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 15.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2021 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm :

Section 10Section 10(23)(iiiab)Section 11Section 143(3)

assessment is completed u/s 143(3) of Rs.2,43,10,295/- to taxed as AOP against returned income of Rs.Nil. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C as per law. Issue notice of demand and challan. Penalty initiated Separately u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and issue separately

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2616/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harpal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 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

P.P. Auto Innovators, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 36(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 581/DEL/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 80I

case. The said ratio has been held by various courts and tribunals. 8. That on facts and circumstances of the case, the charging interest u/s 234A,B,C is illegal, arbitrary and against the settled law on the subject. 9. That the appellant craves to reserve to itself the right

Chhavi Anand, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 9098/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sai Tirupathi Aqua Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 22(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1410/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)Section 68

deleted. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT-A erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the initiation of penalty proceeding under section

Rajesh Kumar Verma, Bhiwani vs. ITO Ward -2, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3286/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 139(5)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 44ASection 80C

That the Ld. AO has erred in not allowing deduction/s of Rs. 2935/- claimed u/s 80C in the assessment order. 6. Charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal and against law. 7. The appeal is within limitation and is filed after payment of statutory fee on 16/03/2019

M/S. Mondon Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3303/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 234A

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging the interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The assessee is a company incorporated in Cyprus. The assessee on 30th November

Humboldt Wedag India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is allowed and the appeal in ITA

ITA 475/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 8119/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Humboldt Wedag India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, A-36, Mehtab House, Mohan Co- Circle-11(2), Op Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110044 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach7474G

For Appellant: Sh. Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

loss has been arrived at. 33. Hence, we decline to interfere with the decision of the ld. DRP on this issue. Charging of interest u/s 234A: (AY 2014-15) 34. We hereby direct the AO to verify the date of filing of return by the assessee with regard