← All Phrases

“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

M/S. Sjr Enterprises Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 484/BANG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 80Section 80I

sale deeds of flats due to larger size and without providing opportunity to submit the same. 10. The LAO erred in levying interest under section 234B and section 234C of the Act amounting to Rs. 2,01,26,975/- and Rs. 12,857/-. 2. Facts of the case are that

Vikas Parasmal Nahar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee succeeds

ITA 2545/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhattFor Respondent: Shri Pravin M ChavanSR.DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 69

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in charging interest under section 234B amounting to Rs. 2,55,879/-and under section 234C amounting to Rs.2,0027- of the Act. 3 Vikas Parasmal Nahar 4.2. The Appellant prays that

The Panchmahals Dist. Co. Op. Bank Ltd., Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 675/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.675/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Panchmahals Dist. Co- The Ito Op.Bank Ltd. बनाम/ Ward-3(1)(2), Prabha Road Vadodara V/S. Dahod Highway Godhra – 389 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaajt 0268 P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 14/08/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 29/12/2019 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income The Panchmahals Dist. Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

under Section 69A of the Act is found to be unjustified, the consequential tax levied under Section 115BBE of the Act and the interest under Section 234B of the Act also stand invalidated. 8. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court

Madhuri Bhattacharya, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 630/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeymadhuri Bhattacharya Acit, Circle 2(3)(1) No. 363, 11Th Cross Bmtc Building 4Th Main Road, 2Nd Block Vs. Koramangala R.T. Nagar, Bangalore 560032 Bangaore 560095 Pan – Ahepb0337N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Deepak Chopra, Ca Revenue By: Shri V. Parithivel, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.02.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2003-24/1061593922(1) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) In Respect Of Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Orders Of Lower Authorities Are Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed For: A) Non-Consideration Of Material On Record & Submissions Of The Appellant B) Want Of Application Of Principles Of Natural Justice. Without Prejudice: 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Making An Addition Of Rs. 1,93,00,000 As Unexplained Investment & 36,00,000 As Expenditure Not Related To The Profession Without Issuing A Show Cause Notice As Mandated

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

profession have to be allowed as such. The disallowance being erroneous has to be deleted. 4 The Appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234B and section 234C of the Act. The interests having been levied erroneously have to be deleted. 5 In the light of above

Western Digital Technologies Inc., United States of America vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, (International Taxation), Circle-2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 343/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

date for filing return of income and not November 30, 2016 for computing interest under section 234A of the Act. 6. Interest under section 234B of the Act 6.1. The Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 7. Initiation

Korn Ferry (Us), California vs. ACIT, Circle 2(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2393/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 274Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

reimbursement, the same would not partake the character of FIS, as no knowledge/skill/know-how was made available 14. That the AD erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 15. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings

Kisanrao Baban Tarmale, Thane vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1716/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 54

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the charging of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act 1961. 6. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds or to amend or alter

Goodyear India Ltd., Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 346/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma CIT (DR ) and Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 92B

against correct interest of Rs. 5,33,170. 10. That the assessing officer erred on the facts and in law in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 11. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in proposing to initiate ... business and were allowable deduction as business expenditure. 7. That the assessing officer erred on the facts and in law in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in proposing to initiate

Goodyear India Ltd, Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1451/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma CIT (DR ) and Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 92B

against correct interest of Rs. 5,33,170. 10. That the assessing officer erred on the facts and in law in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 11. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in proposing to initiate ... business and were allowable deduction as business expenditure. 7. That the assessing officer erred on the facts and in law in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in proposing to initiate

Charies River Laboratories Montreal, Ulc, Canada vs. ACIT, Circle- 1(2)(1) Int. Taxation, New Delhi

ITA 2324/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2019-20 Charles River Laboratories Vs Acit, Montreal, Ulc, Circle-1(2)(1), 22022 Transcanadienenne, International Taxation, Quebec, Senneville, New Delhi. Canada-H9X3R3, Canada. Pan: Aagcc4061J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chavali S. Narayana, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri Chavali S. Narayana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

make available its services to the recipient in accordance with Article 12(4) of the Tax Treaty. 2. Ground 2: Incorrect levy of interest under section 234B of the Act 9 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in levying ... additional interest under section 234B of the Act. 3. Ground 3: Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A

Honda Trading Asia Co. Ltd., Thailand vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation Circle, Noida

ITA 7276/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 12Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 234ASection 234D

accordingly, interest under section ITA No. 7276/Del/2018 & Other 3 appeals of the assessee 17 234A is not applicable. As with regard to interest under section 234B of the Act it was submitted that same is not leviable in the instant case and reliance in this regard was placed

Honda Trading Asia Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida

ITA 1160/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 12Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 234ASection 234D

accordingly, interest under section ITA No. 7276/Del/2018 & Other 3 appeals of the assessee 17 234A is not applicable. As with regard to interest under section 234B of the Act it was submitted that same is not leviable in the instant case and reliance in this regard was placed

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(International Tax) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2751/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 2751/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Anish Thacker & Shri Nishit Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)

return of income has been filed within the due date of filing the return of income; Ground of Appeal No. 14; Levy of Interest under section 234B of the Act. 14. erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to Rs.41,09,09,400; Each

Azingo Soft Systems (India) Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Secunderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 460/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(8)Section 92C

claimed in the return of income filed by the Appellant 21. That the consequential effect should be given to the liability of interest under Section 234B and Section 234D of the Act. 22. The Appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Azingo Soft Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 331/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(8)Section 92C

claimed in the return of income filed by the Appellant 21. That the consequential effect should be given to the liability of interest under Section 234B and Section 234D of the Act. 22. The Appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other

Kohler India Corporation Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 13(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 435/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksa No.63/Del/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.435/Del/2024 Assessment Year 2021-22

For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

giving a categorical direction to grant the same. 4. That impugned order of First Appellate Authority has erred not directing deletion of interest under section 234B of the Act of & 50,40,670/-, which is consequential in nature. 5. That impugned order of First Appellate Authority has erred ... Counsel sought appropriate relief on the issue. 8.7 The ld. Counsel next submitted that the grounds in relation to charge on interest under Sections 234B and 234C are consequential in nature and therefore, may be dealt with appropriately. 9. The ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue, on the other hand

Rwitc Ltd Permanent Employees Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/JCIT Appeals-4, Kolkatta

ITA 1470/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar Sirsalewala, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 2(10)Section 2(19)Section 234BSection 5Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

that the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of Rs. 8,68,670/- be allowed. 2. The Appellant prays that the levy of interest under section 234B & 234C of Rs. 48,774/- be deleted.” 3. The issue involved in the appeal relates to disallowance of claim of deduction

Tpg Capital P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 3132/Mum/2019is allowedand appeal of the revenue bearing ITA 3283/Mum/2019 is dismissed

ITA 3132/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjeetpg Capital India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 1004, The Capital, Plot No.C-70, Income-Tax, Circle-14(3)(1), Mumbai Room O.475, 4Th Floor, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pan :Aabcn6660K Mumbai-400 020 Dcit-14(3)(1), Mumbai Vs Tpg Capital India Private Limited 1004, The Capital, Plot No.C-70, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Pan :Aabcn6660K

For Appellant: Mr. Porus F Kaka / Mr. Manish KanthFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth J (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 250Section 92C(3)

comparables selected by the CIT(A)/AO/TPO. 10. The CIT(A)/ AO erred on facts and circumstances of the case in levying interest under Section 234B, Section 234C and Section 234D of the Act. The Appellant prays that suitable direction to be given to delete/reduce these interest

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Mahaveer Transmission Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2846/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in conforming the action of the AO in wrongly charging interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act.” 2. These are four appeals filed by the assessee and three appeals filed by the Revenue arising from

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Mahaveer Transmission Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2845/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in conforming the action of the AO in wrongly charging interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act.” 2. These are four appeals filed by the assessee and three appeals filed by the Revenue arising from