← 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

Serco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1460/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1460/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Serco India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 6Th Floor, Tower-B, Building No. 8, Circle-2, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs6704P Assessee By : Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.01.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

India Pvt. Ltd. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in charging and computing interest under section 234B of the Act.” 4. The ground-wise submission is made hereunder. Transfer Pricing 5. These grounds are against addition

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

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

ITA 951/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Buro Happold Ltd Vs. Dcit (It) – 1(3)(2) C/O. Urmi Axis, 6Th 1810, 18Th Floor, Air Floor, Famous Studio India Bldg, Lane, Dr. Emoses Road, Narimanpoint,Mumbai- Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 021. 400011. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb9239Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Anuj Kisnadwala. Ar Respondent By : Mr.Milind Chavan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Pursuance To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) U/Sec144C(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr.Anuj Kisnadwala. ARFor Respondent: Mr.Milind Chavan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 234B

Income Tax Act, 1961 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, the learned DCII has erred in levying consequential interest under Section 234B of the Act, amounting

I.B. Communications Network Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 623/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Sri.Nischal B, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 234BSection 56(2)(viib)

That on the facts of the case and circumstances and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest under section 234B of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a company. For the assessment year

Gbt India Private Limited, Delhi vs. National E-Assesment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Stay application is accordingly held to be infructuous

ITA 462/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

upheld. Accordingly, all the additions which have been challenged before us stand deleted. 13. In so far as the ground of charging of interest under Section 234B and 234C are concerned, these are consequential and, therefore, no action is required. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Expeditors International of Washinton, Usa, Washington vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2)(2) Int.Tax., New Delhi

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

ITA 180/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234CSection 271Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

That without prejudice to any other ground of appeal, the Ld. AO on the facts and in law, has erred in levying excessive interest under section 234B of the Act. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in 8. initiating penalty proceedings ... That Without prejudice to any other ground of appeal, the 6. Ld. AO on the facts and in law has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 7. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings

Expeditors International of Washington Inc., Usa vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 1904/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234CSection 271Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

That without prejudice to any other ground of appeal, the Ld. AO on the facts and in law, has erred in levying excessive interest under section 234B of the Act. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in 8. initiating penalty proceedings ... That Without prejudice to any other ground of appeal, the 6. Ld. AO on the facts and in law has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 7. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings

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)

learned AO has erred in computing interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to INR 55,418 being consequential in nature. 7. Interest under section 234B of the Act  The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act.  The learned AO has erred ... fact and law by levying interest under section 234B of the Act as the Appellant is a non-resident company, entire tax was to be deducted at source on payments made by payer to it and there was no question of payment of advance tax by Appellant.  Notwithstanding above

M/S.Nds Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 364/BANG/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 364/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Synamedia Ltd. [Formerly Known As ‘Nds Limited’], The Assistant C/O. M/S. Synamedia India Pvt. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Park, International Survey No. 51-64/4, Taxation, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Vs. Circle – 1(2), Bellandur Village, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 103. Pan: Aabcn2524L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate : Shri Dilip, Standing Revenue By Counsel For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021

For Appellant: Shri
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

assessee and allow credit in accordance with law. The issue raised by the assessee in ground No.6 is with regard to levy of interest under section 234B of the Act. In this regard, we find that the issue with regard to levy of interest under section 234B in the case ... payment them is subject to deduction of tax at source there was no question of advance tax payment by assessee, accordingly, no interest under section 234B could be levied upon assessee. Following the said ration, we direct that there shall be no levy of interest u/s.234B

Aviva International Holdings Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 5650/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri C. N. Prasad[Assessment Year : 2009-10] &

Section 234B

also allowed the Company • to claim the credit of taxes deducted at source by the deductor and deleted the consequential levy of interest under section 234B of the Act, as a result of which the department had also preferred an appeal before the ITAT, Delhi, The Company has filed

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Aviva International Holdings Ltd, London

Appeal is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 5588/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri C. N. Prasad[Assessment Year : 2009-10] &

Section 234B

also allowed the Company • to claim the credit of taxes deducted at source by the deductor and deleted the consequential levy of interest under section 234B of the Act, as a result of which the department had also preferred an appeal before the ITAT, Delhi, The Company has filed

ACIT, Ltu, New Delhi vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal dated 09

ITA 5723/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri N.K. Billaiya

Section 14ASection 44

l.T.A.NO.337/2013. It is pertinent to note that in Rolta India Ltd., the Supreme Court was dealing with the issue of chargeability of interest under Section 234B and 234C of the ct on failure to pay advance tax in respect of tax payable under Section 115JA/ 115JB

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Haryana

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4185/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

DCIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4067/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2280/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

ACIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2230/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Haryana vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 413/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

DCIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 341/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

ACIT, Hisar vs. M/S Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 220/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

Jindal Steel & Power Limited vs. Addl. CIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 167/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. “ Additional Grounds: Section 80HHC “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the assessing officer

Bt Global Communications India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7576/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Bt Global Communication Vs. Acit India Pvt. Ltd. Special Range – 2 11Th Floor, Eros Corporate New Delhi Tower, Opp. International Trade Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan No. Aaacg 1534 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By Shri Satpal Gulati, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax – Special Range–2, New Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Act Pursuant To The Direction Of Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) – 1, New Delhi Order Dated 27.08.2018 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 35ASection 37

capital nature. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in, initiating penalty