“interest under section 234B”

InterestSection 234BSection 234B1,475 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest under section 234B is Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (328 ITR 81), cited in 1,183 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest under section 234B

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court

1,183

citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

252 ITR 1 · 2001 · Supreme Court

452

citing judgments

Levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Tax statutes are to be interpreted strictly, allowing no room for purposive interpretation.

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court

422

citing judgments

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

CIT v. Cotton Naturals (I) (P.) Ltd.

55 Taxmann.com 523 · 2015 · High Court

273

citing judgments

The interest rate for benchmarking foreign currency loans advanced to Associated Enterprises should be the market-determined rate applicable to the currency of the loan, such as LIBOR for US Dollar loans, rather than a domestic lending rate like the Indian PLR.

DIT v. GE Packaged Power Inc.

373 ITR 65 · 2015 · High Court

199

citing judgments

Interest under section 234B for default in payment of advance tax is not leviable when the entire income is subject to tax deduction at source under section 195, as no advance tax liability arises for the assessee in such circumstances.

Karanvir Singh Gossal v. CIT

349 ITR 692 · 2012 · Supreme Court

158

citing judgments

The Supreme Court's decision establishes principles or grounds for seeking a waiver of mandatory interest levied under Sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC

313 ITR 187 · 2009 · High Court

144

citing judgments

Where a duty is cast on the payer to deduct and pay tax at source under Section 195, the payee-assessee cannot be levied interest under Section 234B for failure to pay advance tax if the payer defaults on its TDS obligation. This principle may also extend to interest under Section 234C.

80P(2)(d) of the Act. In Kaliandas Udyag Bhavan Premises Co-op Society Ltd. v. ITO

94 Taxmann.com 15 · 2018 · ITAT

130

citing judgments

A co-operative society, even if it is a co-operative bank whose general deduction under Section 80P is restricted by Section 80P(4), can still claim a deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income derived from its investments held with another co-operative society, as it retains its identity as a co-operative society.

Judgments citing interest under section 234B

Atharv Star India Private Limited, Thane vs. DCIT Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4805/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 148Section 254(1)

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld AO in charging interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Atharv Star India Private Limited, Thane vs. DCIT Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4791/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 148Section 254(1)

Atharv Star India Private Limited, Thane vs. DCIT Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4790/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 148Section 254(1)

Shell India Markets Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 4828/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nMS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 40Section 92C

section 40(a)(ia), mismatch between the tax audit report and the return of income, short grant of advance tax credit, levy of interest under sections 234B and 234D, and initiation of penalty proceedings under section 270A. The grounds, as raised, stand reproduced in extenso hereinbelow:- General Ground ... Appellant. The Appellant prays that the Ld. AO-NaFAC to directed to grant credit of the balance advance tax amount 10. Levy of interest under section 234B of the Act. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO- NaFAC has erred in levying consequential

Inteva Products Netherlands B.V., Netherlands vs. ACIT It Circle 2(1)(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1344/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Inteva Products Netherlands B.V. Vs. Acit, It Circle 2(1)(1), Siriusdreef 17, 2132, Wt, Hoofddorp, Delhi. Netherlands. (Pan :Aadci5208G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kshitij Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Order : 19.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(1)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2022-23Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “Ground 1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle International Tax - 2(1)(1), Delhi ('Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Kshitij Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270A

applied. Ground 6 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act corresponding to the addition of INR 8,28,34,750 as FTS. The Appellant prays that the consequential interest levied

Marelli (India) Private Limited, Gurugram vs. Deputy Commissionar of Income-Tax, Circle 16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1136/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh.Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2020-21 Marelli (India) Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 5Th Floor, Tower 8, Candor Income Tax, Circle 16(1) Teachspace,One Reality Project Cr Building, Delhi It/Ites Sez Village Tikri Sector 48 Gurugram Haryana-122018 Pan No. Aagcm2620K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding the levy of interest under section 234B,234C and 234D of the Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is accompany engaged in the business ... Form 10IC has been filed within the extended due date, the corresponding ground of appeal is therefore dismissed. Ground relating to levy of interest under section 234B, 234C and 234D: 4.9 The levy of interest u/s.234B, 234C and 234D are consequential in nature and will get adjusted when the other

Dakshin Kalikata Sansad, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1576/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1576/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Dakshin Kalikata Sansad,….…..……...……Appellant 93/1B, Rash Behari Avenue, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aaatd5902A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 57

assessee at Rs.41,44,8848/- and initiated penalty proceedings separately under section 270A of the Act for under reporting of income and charged interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act. Not being satisfied with the order of ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before

Pcl Foods Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addi CIT, National E- Assesment Centre, New Delhi

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

ITA 442/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 92C

appeal is premature in nature and hence, dismissed. 13.2 Ground no. 21 of the appeal is reproduced as under: 21. That the interest under section 234B, section 234C of the Act being consequential in nature is prayed not to be upheld” ITA No.- 442/Del/2021 PCL Foods Pvt. Ltd. 13.3 This

M/S.Ibs Software Services P. Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The DCIT, Trivandrum

ITA 601/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 92C

raised by the Assessee are dismissed. Ground No.16 19. Ground No.16 raised by the Assessee pertains to computation of interest under Section 234B and 234C of the Act and the same is dismissed as being consequential in nature. 14 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Ground No.17 20. Ground No.17 raised

Ahluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Private Limited, Kota vs. DCIT/ACIT Cir-2, Kota

In the result the appeal of

ITA 199/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 438Section 43B

amount of Rs.2,19,391/- as claimed by the appellant and allow the same if found in order. Grounds raised regarding charging of interest under section 234B & C are of consequential in nature, hence not adjudicated. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised hereby are partly allowed. 6. In the result

Ahluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Private Limited, Kota vs. DCIT/ACIT Cir-2, Kota

In the result the appeal of

ITA 198/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

Ahluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Private Limited, Kota vs. DCIT/ACIT Cir-2, Kota

In the result the appeal of

ITA 197/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 438Section 43B

Nilesh Ishwar Mehta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-17(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4931/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarnilesh Ishwar Mehta V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of 2301/A, 23Rd Floor, बनाम Income Tax-17(1) Parthenon Building, J.P. Room No. 117, Kautilya Road, Mumbai – 400 053, Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Maharashtra Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpm2417P Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 56(2)(vii)

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Ground no.1-Facts in brief are that the assessee derives income from commission, share income from

Linklaters LLP, London vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle (3)(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1222/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Linklaters Llp Assistant Commissioner Of C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Income Tax (International Llp, Tower 3, 27-32 Floor, One Taxation) - 3(1)(2), International Centre, Mumbai Elphinstone Mill Compound, Vs. Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone (West), Mumbai – 400 013. (Pan: Aabcl5182G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Niraj Sheth, Advocate Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

rate at 10% (plus surcharge and cess) being beneficial rate provided under section 115A of the Act for fees for technical services. Interest under section 234B 39. The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 2348 of the Act at Rs. 18,20,907. The appellant denies liability

Ravi Shroff, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - 25(3), Mumbai, Bandra (East)

In the result, all remaining ground are allowed with the aforesaid directions

ITA 4186/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 254(1)Section 28Section 28(1)

facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234B of the Act treating the same as compensatory, without considering the fact that self-assessment tax amounting to Rs.9,25,000/- paid

Mrs Shireen J. Dastur, Mumbai vs. ITO Int Taxation Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2204/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Shireen J. Dastur Income Tax Officer, 330, Coral Avenue, (International Taxation), New Port Beach, Ward 2(1)(1), California Vs. Mumbai 92662 Usa (Pan : Ctlpd0257N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Gunjan Kakkad, Advocate Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate and Ms. Gunjan Kakkad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144C(5)Section 234B

capital gain. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO and DRP has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act.” 3. The core issue arising in the present appeal for our consideration is in respect of amount of Rs.15Crores received

Cppgroup Services Limited, Leeds, United Kingdom vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 980/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2022-23]

Section 143(3)Section 234B

paid @ 2% in the computation sheet issued along-with the final assessment order. 5. Without prejudice, the Ld. AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act in the computation sheet issued along-with the final assessment order. 3. The assessee is a company incorporated and registered

Matrix Automotive, Mumbai vs. Ward 41(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2607/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Matrix Automotive Income Tax Officer-Ward Shop No. 1,2,3,4 Ground Floor, 41(3)(2), Mumbai Business Classic, Chincholi Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, G Block Bunder Road, Malad West, Bkc, Gilban Area, Bandra Mumbai 400064 Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 Pan No. Aaxfm5446P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Dipesh Ruparelia (Virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234DSection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

whereas the source of the funds were duly explained by the Appellant; 10. Erred in levying interest under Section 234B and Section 234D of the Act; and 11. Erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(b) and Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant craves leave

Skechers Sarl, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly

ITA 2028/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 234BSection 270A

Permanent Establishment in India, it would not be chargeable to tax in India, and hence, not liable to tax in India, Levy of interest under section 234B of the Act 6. erred in levying interest of INR 1,19,85,816 under section 234B of the Act, Initiation of penalty

The Milestone Aviation Asset Holding Group No.25 Ltd., Ireland vs. ACIT Int. Tax. Circle 3(1)(1) New Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided in favour of the appellant assessees and against the Revenue

ITA 1351/DEL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.1350/Del./2025, A.Y. 2022-23 Vertical Aviation No. 1 Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of Dolmen House, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax, 4 Earlsfort Terrace, Vs. Circle Int. Tax. - 3(1)(1), Dublin 2, Ireland Do2E024 Civic Centre, Minto Road, Pan: Aafcv8726N New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No.1351/Del./2025, A.Y. 2022-23 The Milestone Aviation Assistant Commissioner Of Asset Holding Group No. 25 Income Tax, Ltd., Vs. Circle Int. Tax. - 3(1)(1), Dolmen House, 3Rd Floor, Civic Centre, Minto Road, 4 Earlsfort Terrace, New Delhi-10002 Dublin 2, Ireland D02E024 Pan: Aahct8009N (Appellant) (Respondent) Both Appellant By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate Ms. Rashi Khanna, Advocate Ms. Viyushti Rawat, Advocate (Vc) Sh. Devansh Jain, Advocate Ms. Disha Jham, Advocate Sh. Soham Dua, Advocate, Sh. Hardeep Singh, Advocate & Sh. A. S. Bajpai, Advocate Both Respondent By Shri Indruj S. Rai, Spl. Counsel, Sh. Sanjeev Menon, Jr. Sc, Sh. Rahul Singh, Jr. Sc, Sh. Gaurav Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rini Handa, Jcit (Intl. Tax) Date Of Hearing 12/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 Common & Identical.

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 194LSection 9(1)(vii)

above grounds; therefore, these issues are left open to be dealt with at the appropriate stage. 19. The appellants have assailed charging of interest under section 234B of the Act. Charging of interest under is mandatory and consequential; hence, the said ground of appeal is dismissed. 20. The appellants have