“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

Edenred Sa, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 508/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

allowed for statistical purposes. 16. The issue arising in ground No. 7, raised in assessee’s appeal, is pertaining to levy of interest under section 234B of the Act. In view of the Edenred SA A.Y. 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15 & 2015–16 decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court ... Erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to INR 356 which is not as per law; 7. Interest under section 234B of the Act Erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to INR 19,580 disregarding the fact that the Appellant

General Electric Company, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (It) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2001-02 is allowed and the appeal of revenue for A

ITA 82/MUM/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri M Balaganeshm/S. General Electric Company, C/O Kpmg, Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011 Pan Aaacg5399M …Appellant. Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Tax, (International Taxation)-3(1), Room No.136, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N M Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038. ….Respondent. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-3(1), Mumbai-400 038 ….Appellant. Vs. M/S. General Electric Company, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai. ….Respondent. Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Ms. Fereshte Sethna, Shri Mrunal Parekh, Shri Abhishek Tilak & Shri Ameya Pany. Revenue By : Ms. Surabi Sharma, Cit D.R. Shri Sunil Umap, Cit- D.R. Date Of Hearing : 15.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Ms. Surabi Sharma, CIT

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 5Section 9

amount of sales made in India as attribution of income, confirmed to the extent of 2.6% of the total sales; and (iv) Deleted interest under section 234B of the Act charged by the Assessing Officer following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in assessee’s own group cases

DDIT (It) 3(1), Mumbai vs. General Electric Company, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2001-02 is allowed and the appeal of revenue for A

ITA 432/MUM/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Ms. Surabi Sharma, CIT

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 5Section 9

M/S. Buro Happold Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT (Int Tax) -1(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 1690/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Us:-

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234B

under the Act while computing the amount of tax payable by the Appellant. 4. Ground No. IV-Erroneous levy of consequential interest under section 234B. 4.1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned DCIT has erred in levying consequential interest under Section 234B

M/S. Firmenich Aromatics Production India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 9(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6116/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna/Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Somaiya

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92CSection 94C

have been incurred towards Capital Work in Progress. The Appellant prays that the disallowance be deleted. 6. Ground No. 6: Levy of interest under section 234B of the Income-tax Act 1961 ("the Act") On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... erred in not adjudicating on the consequential interest under section 234B of the Act. The Appellant prays that the consequential interest be deleted. 7. Ground No. 7: Initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Rahee Jhajharia E to E (Jv), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.-32, Kolkata

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

ITA 135/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 135/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Rahee Jhajharia E To E (Jv),..................Appellant “Kemwell Manor”, 5Th Floor, 10/D/2, Ho Chi Minh Sarani, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aabar5042H] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..Respondent Circle-32, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri K.K. Khemka, Advocate & Shri Anuj Musaddi, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 40A(2)(b)Section 92B

recorded. 3. In Ground No. 10, the assessee has submitted that the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in charging interest under section 234B of Rs.81,27,990/-. However, ld. Counsel for the assessee did not press this ground of appeal and submitted that it is consequential

Ask Investment Managers Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, 6(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1115/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharyask Investment Vs. Dcit-6(1)(2) Managers Limited Aayakar Bhavan, Birla Aurora, 16 Level, M.K. Road, Office Floor 9, Dr. Annie Mumbai - 400020 Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400030 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aafca2302P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : J.D. Mistri & Shreyam Shah Respondent By : Mehul Jain

For Appellant: J.D. Mistri &For Respondent: Mehul Jain

Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 23B

Rs.12.13.63,859/- which is included in the income of Appellant C. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO PASS ORDER ON EXCESS LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT RS. 2.49,653/- 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) erred ... passing order quoting that interest under section 234B of the Act at Rs.2,49,653 are consequential and do not require specific adjudication 7. Once the excess interest charged under section 234C of the Act as stated in Para B above is deleted, the interest under section 234B

Ubs Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1)

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 842/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234Section 92C

no.842/Mum./2016 and ITA no. 1347/Mum/.2016 12. Ground No.4, raised in assessee’s appeal, is pertaining to the levy of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act, which is consequential in nature. Therefore, ground No. 4 is allowed for statistical purposes. 13. The application dated 24/03/2021

DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ubs Ag, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1347/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234Section 92C

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hubballi vs. M/S. Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank Limited, Dharwad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 720/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Susan D George, CIT (DR)

Section 143Section 234BSection 250Section 36

Apex Court in the case of Karanvir Singh 349 hR 692, the Appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest under section 234B, 234D and 244A of the Income Tax Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. Further the levy of interest under section 234B, 234D

Sonicwall Technology System India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 15 (1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3860/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Singh

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

response to notice issued under Section 133(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 6. That the AO erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the same. 7. That the AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section ... general in nature and needs no separate adjudication in view of our aforesaid findings. 10. Ground No. 6 pertains to the levy of interest under section 234B of the Act, which is consequential in nature. Therefore, the said ground is allowed for statistical purposes. Sonicwall Technology System India

M/S Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank, Dharwad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hubballi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 611/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S Ananthan, C.A, S.V Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Susan D George, CIT (DR)

Section 143Section 234BSection 250Section 36

M/S Toyota Kirloskar Motors (P) Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

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

ITA 150/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 40A(2)

called for: GENERAL GROUNDS. 20. The lower authorities have erred in levying a sum of Rs 86,94,71,473/- as interest under section 234B. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, nterest under section 234B is not applicable. Even otherwise, the interest u/s 234B is excessive

M/S. Lupin Investments Pvt. Ltd (As A Sucessor to Novamed Investments Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commisssioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1812/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br, Accountat Member & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Lupin Investments Vs. Acit, Circle – 14(1)(1) Pvt Ltd (Successor To Mumbai. Novamed Investments Pvt Ltd.,) 159, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400098. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl1070G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Hemen Chandaria.Ar Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sinha.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30.11.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 35ASection 80G

section 35AC of ITA. Demand 10. The learned Assessing Officer ought to be directed to delete the demand of Rs. 18,72,550. Interest under section 234B 11. The learned Assessing Officer ought to be directed to delete the interest of Rs. 1,47,762 levied under section 234B

Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result we are not inclined to interfere in the order of Ld

ITA 6256/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyaltech Mahindra Limited, C/O Marriott Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacm3484F ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-2(3), Room No. 552, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Acit Circle-2(3)(1), Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. ..... Appellant Vs. Tech Mahindra Limited, C/O Marriott Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacm3484F ..... Respondent Appellant/Assessee By : Sh. J.D. Mistri / Sh. Harsh Kapadia Respondent/Revenue By : Sh. K.C. Kanojia- Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sh. J.D. Mistri / Sh. Harsh KapadiaFor Respondent: Sh. K.C. Kanojia- CIT-DR

Section 10(34)Section 10ASection 14ASection 234BSection 250Section 32(1)

income which forms a part of the total income of the Appellant offered to tax in India. 4. Ground No. 4- Interest under section 234B and 234C: 4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred and learned CIT (A) further erred ... upholding levy of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act.” 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)has erred in holding that consideration relating to expenditure incurred

Infiniti Retail Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 11(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 461/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234DSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

115JB of the Act. 8. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in levying interest under Section 234B of the Act of Rs. 29,51,816. 9. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned ... directions, Ground No. 7 is stands disposed off. Ground No. 8 and 9 23. Ground No. 8 and 9 pertain to levy of interest under Section 234B and 234D of the Act, respectively and are being disposed off as being consequential in nature. In result, the appeal preferred

ACIT CC-43, Mumbai vs. Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 4295/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

assessee is accordingly allowed partly for statistical purposes. 11.0 The ground No. 7(seven) of the appeal relates to charging of interest under section 234B of the Act, which being consequential in nature, is dismissed as infructuous. 12. Now we take up the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year ... appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed partly for statistical purposes. 29. The ground no. 9 of the appeal relates to charging of interest under section 234B of the Act, which being a consequential ground, same is dismissed as infructuous. 30. The ground No. 10 of the appeal

ACIT CC-43, Mumbai vs. Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 4294/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

ACIT CC-43, Mumbai vs. Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 4293/MUM/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 43, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 2863/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C