← 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

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1782/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

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

Sri Vinayaka Projects, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1598/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudharysri Vinayaka Projects C/O Chandrodaya Theatre Vidyapeeta Circle, Kathriguppa Main Road Bangalore 560 050 ………. Appellant [Pan: Achfs9700J]

For Appellant: Sri R. ChandrasekharFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian
Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

accordance with the law and is opposed to principles of natural justice. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 6. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. 7. The learned

Shri Vir Transport Opertors Copo Credit & Service Society Ltd., Dahod vs. The Dy. CIT, Anand Circle, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1465/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Ms. Ursvashi Sodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 270ASection 56Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD sSftrpita aed Ween, Cal Hae & BAA BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR

Gireesh Chandra, Etah vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Etah

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 264/AGR/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

cost of improvement incurred by the appellant. 12. That the learned Authorities has erred in law and on facts in wrongly charging interest u/s 234A and 2348. 13. That the order is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 14. That any other relief or reliefs deemed

Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur, Civil Lines vs. Smita Mukesh Kedia, Raipur

ITA 451/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 451/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 44ASection 69C

accordingly the same is dismissed as infructuous. 6.5 Regarding Grounds No. 6 to 8, the AO is directed to calculate interest u/s 234A and 2348 as per provisions of the Act after giving effect to this order. 6.6 Grounds no. 9 and 10 are related to penalty proceedings. The same

Usb Financial Corporation Ltd, Noida vs. ITO Ward-1(2)(4), Meerut

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

ITA 376/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Usb Financial Corporation Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, Suit No. 201, H-160, Sector-63 Ward- 1(2)(4), Noida, Uttar Pradesh Meerut Pin: 201 301 Pan :Aabcs9381C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 271Section 68

will be and notice at the time of hearing. 6. The honable CIT(A) has erred in law in by directing for charging Interest u/s 234A, B & C,D. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing. 7. The honable CIT(A) has erred in law initiating

Raj Kumar Daga HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 30(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 709/DEL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 250

grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 6. That the Learned A.O. has further erred in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act and raising an aggregate demand of Rs. 20,38,330/-. Thus failing to appreciate that no such interest was leviable

Raj Kumar Daga HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 30(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 699/DEL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 250

grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 6. That the Learned A.O. has further erred in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act and raising an aggregate demand of Rs. 20,38,330/-. Thus failing to appreciate that no such interest was leviable

Intact Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 825/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250

order 143(3) dated 29.12.2017. b) Ignoring the brought forward loss claimed by the appellant. 10. The Id. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.52,40,870/- 3. The assessee in ITA No.824/Bang/2025 for the AY 2016-17 has raised ... expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the appellant. 9. The Id. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.73,25,067/- 4. The assessee in ITA No.825/Bang/2025 for the AY 2017-18 has raised

Intact Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 824/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Zain Ahmed Khan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250

order 143(3) dated 29.12.2017. b) Ignoring the brought forward loss claimed by the appellant. 10. The ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.52,40,870/- 3. The assessee in ITA No.824/Bang/2025 for the AY 2016-17 has raised ... expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the appellant. 9. The ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.73,25,067/- ITA Nos.823 to 824/Bang/2025 Intact Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page

Intact Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 823/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Zain Ahmed Khan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250

order 143(3) dated 29.12.2017. b) Ignoring the brought forward loss claimed by the appellant. 10. The ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.52,40,870/- 3. The assessee in ITA No.824/Bang/2025 for the AY 2016-17 has raised ... expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the appellant. 9. The ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. Total tax effect Rs.73,25,067/- ITA Nos.823 to 824/Bang/2025 Intact Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page

Sagar Devi Lal Joshi, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 26(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 5654/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr.DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 43B

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

Vandana Jain, Sonipat vs. PCIT(Central)-1, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2343/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2341 To 2343/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2019-20 बनाम Vandana Jain Pcit (Central), Veersons Building, Gohana Road, Vs. Delhi-1. Fazilpur B.O. Barwasni (202), Sonipat, Haryana, India. Pan No.Aampj6134E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 154Section 234ASection 263Section 68

case, the Ld. PCIT has erred both on facts and in law in directing the Assessing Officer to re-compute the interest u/s 234A of the Act. (ii) That the re-computation of interest u/s 234A may at most be a matter of rectification u/s

Vandana Jain, Sonipat vs. PCIT(Central)-1, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2342/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2341 To 2343/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2019-20 बनाम Vandana Jain Pcit (Central), Veersons Building, Gohana Road, Vs. Delhi-1. Fazilpur B.O. Barwasni (202), Sonipat, Haryana, India. Pan No.Aampj6134E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 154Section 234ASection 263Section 68

case, the Ld. PCIT has erred both on facts and in law in directing the Assessing Officer to re-compute the interest u/s 234A of the Act. (ii) That the re-computation of interest u/s 234A may at most be a matter of rectification u/s

Vandana Jain, Sonipat vs. PCIT(Central)-1, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2341/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2341 To 2343/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2019-20 बनाम Vandana Jain Pcit (Central), Veersons Building, Gohana Road, Vs. Delhi-1. Fazilpur B.O. Barwasni (202), Sonipat, Haryana, India. Pan No.Aampj6134E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 154Section 234ASection 263Section 68

case, the Ld. PCIT has erred both on facts and in law in directing the Assessing Officer to re-compute the interest u/s 234A of the Act. (ii) That the re-computation of interest u/s 234A may at most be a matter of rectification u/s

Kailash Chandra Patidar, Shajapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Shajapur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 216/IND/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Nov 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 250Section 253

This is the period when learned A.O. issue notices and thereafter passed assessment order ex-parte confirming demand of tax along with interest u/s 234A, 234B, & 234C. 5. Without prejudice to the above, The Learned CIT (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) has grossly erred to appreciate that notice under

Kailash Chandra Patidar, Shajapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Shajapur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 196/IND/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Nov 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 250Section 253

This is the period when learned A.O. issue notices and thereafter passed assessment order ex-parte confirming demand of tax along with interest u/s 234A, 234B, & 234C. 5. Without prejudice to the above, The Learned CIT (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) has grossly erred to appreciate that notice under

Sneha Binoy Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Circle 19(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5007/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Smit C. Jhaveri, CA a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra- CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

without going into the merit of the case simply disallowed the appeal on account of delay in filing the said appeal. GOA No.4 Interest U/s. 234A,234B, 234C • The Ld. ITO (NFAC) has levied interest U/s 234A, 234B, 234C of Income Tax Act 1961 on taxes which has been confirmed

Amli Mohammed Taj, Kurnool vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Guntur

ITA 397/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.397/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Amli Mohammed Taj, Vs. Dcit, Kurnool. Central Circle-2, Pan: Achpt2412N Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 06/11/2025 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 19/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 04/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 19/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154Section 69A

While passing the assessment order, the AO had inadvertently levied tax @ 30% instead of correct rate 60% and surcharge of 25%. The interest u/s 234A and 234B were also, short levied. The AO had completed the order u/s 154 by raising the total tax payable

Anita Rani W/O Sh. Rajender Singh, Cheeka Guhla, Kaithal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kaithal

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

ITA 781/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Monga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prem Singh, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 69

play. vi. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in upholding the charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act,1961. vii. That the appellant seeks permission to add/amend any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing