“interest u/s 234B”

InterestSection 234BSection 234B1,217 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest u/s 234B is DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC (313 ITR 187), cited in 144 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest u/s 234B

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.

CIT v. Ranchi Club Ltd.

247 ITR 209 · 2001 · Supreme Court

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.

27th Nov., 2001 and Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc. v. Dy. CIT

72 ITD 415 · 2000 · ITAT

citing judgments

Interest under section 234B is not leviable if the entire income of the assessee is liable to tax deduction at source, irrespective of whether tax was actually deducted.

ACIT v. Hans Raj Gandhi

37 ITR 418 · Reported

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.

MBG Commodities (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

163 ITD 130 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Interest under section 234B needs to be recalculated, affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing and considering judicial decisions.

CIT vs. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. (2004) and CIT v. Reading and Bates Exploration Co.

278 ITR 47 · Reported

citing judgments

Interest under section 234 cannot be levied if the employer fails to deduct tax at source, as the employee should not be faulted for the employer's default.

Spice Infotainment v. Commissioner of Income

18 SCC 353 · 2020 · Reported

citing judgments

An assessment made in the name of a company that has been amalgamated and dissolved is null and void.

Entertainment Ltd. v. Commr. of Service Tar, (2011 SCC OnLine Del), CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P) Ltd.

2014 SCC OnLine DEL 7678 · 2014 · Reported

citing judgments

The court does not interfere with impugned judgments previously passed by the High Court in cases dealing with various aspects of income tax law.

Judgments citing interest u/s 234B

Rajesh Mangla, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-II, Faridabad

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2815/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Dcit, Rajesh Mangla, H. No. 536, Sector-14, Central Circle-Ii, Faridabad Faridabad Pin: 121 007 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 132(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 234BSection 271A

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 15. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal

Jitendra Kumar, Arwal vs. Addl/JCIT(A)-2 Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 394/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 250(6)Section 270A(2)

taking 8% of Added Turnover (Rs. 64,01,158.00). 3. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the charge of interest u/s 234B at Rs. 30,624 is arbitrary, unjust and bad in law. The interest may be quantified in view of jurisdictional High Court decisions

Vaishali Developers and Builders, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer -1(2), Bhopal

Appeals are allowed

ITA 27/IND/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Gupta

Section 143(3)Section 80

project "Vaishali Nagar". 9. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the levy of interest u/s 234B is unlawful and hence, be cancelled. 10. That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, delete and or modify any of the grounds at the time ... appellant. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the levy of interest u/s. 234B is unlawful and hence, be cancelled. 7. That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, delete and or modify any of the grounds at the time of this

Vaishali Developers Andbuilders, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer 1 (2), Bhopal

Appeals are allowed

ITA 26/IND/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 80

appellant. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the levy of interest u/s. 234B is unlawful and hence, be cancelled. 7. That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, delete and or modify any of the grounds at the time of this

Ester Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3618/DEL/2023[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम Btl Industries Ltd., Dcit, (Merged With & Now Known As Vs. Central Circle-Ii, M/S Btl Holding Co. Ltd.), Faridabad, C/O Srs Mall, Third Floor, Haryana. Sector-12, Faridabad, Haryana. Pan No.Aaccb0573C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent &

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 234B

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in charging interest u/s 234B, more so when such interest could not be levied under the law. 6) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

Smit Chhaganbhai Ardeshna, Alka Society Akota Vadodara vs. AO, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1534/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 234C

erred in fact and in Law in initiating penalty proceedings. 271AAC1. 6. The learned AO erred in fact and in Law in charging interest u/s 234B of the Act. 7. The leaned AO erred in fact and in Law in charging interest u/s 234C of the Act. 8. Your Appellant

Rajendra Goyal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-41(2), New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1941/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal

Jajoo Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CC 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for A

ITA 6343/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Acit, Cc – 4(3) Jajoo Enterprises Ltd Flat No. 42/B, Jaihind Estate, 3Rd Floor, Ld.Dr. A.M Road, Maharashtra – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj9939L (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 145(3)Section 250Section 37(1)

interest and initiation of penalty proceeding. The charging of interest is consequential to the assessed income and is mandatory. The levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act is mandatory and arises as a consequence of the income assessed. The appellant has not explained how the charging

Hsbc Securities and Capital Markets (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai-4, Mumbai

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

ITA 2586/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Krupa Gandhi, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 154Section 263

underassessment of income by Rs.5,79,56,973/- with a consequent short levy of tax of Rs. 1,88,04,139/- excluding interest u/s 234B of the I.T. Act, if any. 4. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and material on record, I have reasons

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bilaspur vs. Ms Mayura Saria Pvt. Ltd., Bilaspur

ITA 430/RPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 430/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं

Parkkot Maritima Agencies Private Limited, Vasco vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Margao

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 169/PAN/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 169/Pan/2023 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Parkkot Maritime Agencies Pvt Ltd. Parkkot House, Swatantra Path, Vasco-Da-Gama, Goa-403802 Pan : Aadcp1208P . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-1, Margoa, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr S V Shivrama Iyer [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1055088420(1) Dt. 11/08/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘The Act’] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Regular Assessment Dt. 16/03/2015 Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Margao, Goa [In Short ‘Ld. Ao’].

For Appellant: Mr S V Shivrama Iyer [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 199Section 234BSection 250

short ‘AFS’] r.w. return of income filed by the assessee company. The first ground being general calling no adjudication. Fourth ground relating to interest u/s 234B & 243D being premature at this stage not pressed for. The legal ground raised in appeal memo is endorsed as not pressed, therefore adjudication thereof

Pappu Kumar, Samastipur vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Darbhanga

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

ITA 212/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 144Section 234BSection 250Section 271A

that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer charging in the interest u/s 234B and 234C which is not correct. 9. For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer

Xander Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur

ITA 549/RPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 549/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Taranuum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 205Section 234Section 234BSection 250

grounds of appeal only revising the amount of short credit of TDS. The other grounds of appeal are related to consequential levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 5.2 In this regard, without going into the merits of the issues involved and without going into what different ... appellant. This ground of appeal is therefore allowed subject to the above examination and verification. 5.3 As regard the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C, it is again reiterated that charging of such interest are mandatory as per Act. These depend on the amount and dates of payment

The Janseva Trust, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1)(2), Vadodara (Now Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Godhra)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the above directions

ITA 851/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.851/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Janseva Trust The Ito बनाम/ Opp. Gyandeep School Ward-4(1)(1)(2), Vadodara V/S. Nr.Jivanlal Hospital (Now Ito, Ward-1, Godhra – 389 001 (Gujarat) Godhra – 389 001) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaatt 2888 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Nikhita Bhamblani & Amrin Pathan, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 29.08.2023, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The Said Appeal Arises From The Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Ito), Ward 4(1)(2), Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”], Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act)”], On 24.12.2019. The Janseva Trust Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Nikhita Bhamblani &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

confirming interest u/s 234A of the Act. 16. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming interest u/s 234B of the Act. 17. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming interest u/s 234C of the Act. 18. The learned

H D M C Employees Co-Op Credit Society Limited, Hubli vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Hubli

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

ITA 2144/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kotresh .K, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Vidhya .K, JCIT-DR

Section 234BSection 68Section 80Section 80(8)Section 80P(2)(a)

Rs.86,400/- is eligible for deduction u/s 80(P)(a)(i). o f The Learned National Faceless Appeal 7 center erred in upholding interest u/s 234B Rs. 1108649 R and 234C as computed by the AO. s . 4 2 , 5 7 , 0 0 Page 3 of 5 Each

Shriram Narayan Tikde, Nagpur vs. Income Tax, Ward 4(4), Nagpur

ITA 89/NAG/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 68

subsequent submissions were an afterthought. 9. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in levying excess interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. 10. The Appellant prays leave of the Hon’ble Tribunal to add, amend, alter any of the Grounds of appeal

Jsw Minerals Trading Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6137/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms.Deepa Khare,ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, (CIT DR)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234B

erred in confirming charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C and raising a demand of Rs.12,02,73,660. The demand and interest u/s 234B and 234C be cancelled. 3. The main issue involved in the above appeal pertains to denial of option u/s 115BAA on the ground that

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4658/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A

INTEREST U/S 234A INTEREST U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST U/S 234C INTEREST U/S 234C 50,511 50,511 49. GROSS DEMAND GROSS DEMAND

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4608/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4606/MUM/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta

Section 153(5)Section 244A