“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

Chetan Shashikant Thakkar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 27(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7320/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Vishal D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (Sr. DR)

Section 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

under the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) the LD. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which is consequential in nature and liable to be deleted. 3. Brief facts of the case

Manish Kantilal Haria, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer International Tax Ward 2 (2) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6187/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Chag (virtually appeared)For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR

Section 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D. Interest levied be deleted. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in not dropping initiation

Park View Automotives Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 19(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5711/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13 Park View Automotives P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, S-606, School Block, Ward 19(3), Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. Delhi – 110 092. Pan: Aaecp3499H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Jain, Ca & Shri Samyak Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2026 Order Per Madhumita Roy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Jain, CA &For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

under bogus transaction of the I.T. Act stand confirmed and the grounds relating to these issues are dismissed. Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B , since the same is mandatory and consequential with quantum addition , the said ground need not require separate adjudication and hence dismissed .” 7. It is the fact

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Eberspaecher Suetrak Bus Climate Control Systems India Private Limited, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed as premature

ITA 3665/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

levy of interest under section 234B is against the provisions of section 234B(3) of the Income Tax Act. 5.13.1 The charging of interest u/s 234B of Income Tax Act is consequential in nature therefore, it needs no separate adjudication. However, it is needless to mention here that the assessing

Meghji Mansukhlal Dodhia, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITA 2224/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. It(Ss)A No. 2226/Mum/2025 S.A. No. 79/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Mansukhlal Meghji Dodhia House No. 104, Dodhia House, New Mavji Compound, Narpoli, Maharashtra-421 302 (Applicant) Dcit Cc-3, Thane Vs. Room No. 12, A Wing, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Thane, West, Maharashtra - 400 604 Pan/Gir No. Aaspd6746L (Respondent) 2. Ita No. 2224/Mum/2025 S.A. No. 80/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) 3. It(Ss)A No. 2223/Mum/2025 S.A. No. 81/Mum/2025 & 4. It(Ss)A No. 2222/Mum/2025 S.A. No. 82/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 5. It(Ss)A No. 2225/Mum/2025 S.A. No. 83/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Meghji Mansukhlal Dodhia House No. 104, Dodhia House, New Mavji Compound, Narpoli, Maharashtra-421 302 (Applicant) Dcit Cc-3, Thane Vs. Room No. 12, A Wing, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Thane, West, Maharashtra - 400 604 Pan/Gir No. Aaspd6746L (Respondent) (2) It(Ss)A No. 2226, 2223, 2222 & 2225/Mum/2025 &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69D

circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 15. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case

Elegance Reality, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 2637/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 153CSection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 3(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT

Zuari Management Services Ltd., Goa vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Margao

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 85/PAN/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Salil Kapoor [‘Ld. AR]For Respondent: Mr Senthil Kumar N [‘Ld. DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

levying interest under section 234B of the Act, as the tax payable after the additions is less than Rs.5,000/- and hence, no interest u/s 234B is chargeable. 3. We have heard rival party’s arguments & submissions and subject to rule 18 of Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963 [ITAT-Rules ... disallowing the claim for deduction in the absolute absence of third-party evidence. The ground thus dismissed on very terms. Ground No 6: Interest u/s 234B of the Act 23. The section 208 of the Act fastens a liability on every person/assessee whose estimated tax liability exceeds prescribed ceiling

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 6(1)(1), Maharashtra

ITA 6703/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

/Mum/2025 Aditya Birla Sun Life AMC Limited GROUND NO. III: EXCESS LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234B OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,31,027/- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in levying excess ... interest u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/-. 2. The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to delete the excess interest levied u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/- being consequential in nature. GROUND NO. IV: EXCESS LEVY OF INTEREST U/S

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 6(1)(1), Maharashtra

ITA 6702/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

prays that the AO be directed to grant the balance TDS credit of Rs. 15,76,346/-. GROUND NO. III: EXCESS LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234B OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,31,027/- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred ... confirming the action of the AO in levying excess interest u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/-. 2. The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to delete the excess interest levied u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/- being consequential

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 6 (1)(1), Maharashtra

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

ITA 6701/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

prays that the AO be directed to grant the balance TDS credit of Rs. 15,76,346/-. GROUND NO. III: EXCESS LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234B OF THE АСТ AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,31,027/- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred ... confirming the action of the AO in levying excess interest u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/-. 2. The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to delete the excess interest levied u/s 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,31,027/- being consequential

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Maharashtra

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

ITA 6663/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

Eradicatus Infectus Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

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

ITA 3934/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: CA Vkas Singh & CA V.K. JainFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 288(2)Section 44ASection 80Section 801Section 801ASection 801A(7)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘I’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI

M/S. Topgrain Corporate Service Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2276/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 11Section 115JSection 12Section 14Section 14ASection 234BSection 234C

question arises in this appeal is whether 14A disallowance can be added to book profit while computing income u/s 115JB and charging of interest u/s 234B and particularly interest u/s 234C. We have gone through the Clause (f) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB states: "The book profit ... addition u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D of Rs.98,497/- is deleted. Since we have already deleted the addition, hence charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of Rs.7,25,878/- are also hereby deleted. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Kolkata, the 5th February, 2026. [Rajesh

Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 429/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 271ASection 69A

proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in fact and in law in charging interest u/s 234B of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves the right to add, to alter, to substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above

Honda Trading Corporation India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Dc/ACIT, Circle 10(1), Delhi / Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, New Delhi

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

ITA 5286/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 92C

28th February 2022 by Circular No.9/2021 dated 20.05.2021 and Circular No. 17/2021 dated 09.09.2021 respectively. 9.2 The above grounds regarding charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C are consequential in nature. The AO is directed to verify and charge interest as per law after giving effect to this order

Ketan Natvarlal Shah, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 894/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year:2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 274

subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in charging interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act on account of delay in payment of tax. 7. It is therefore prayed that the above addition may please be deleted

Hira Manek Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 34(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2020-

ITA 8500/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

ITAT and various High Courts holding that interest from cooperative banks is deductible u/s 80P(2)(d). 5. Erroneous Levy of Interest u/s 234B and 234C: The Learned CIT (A) has erred in upholding the levy of Interest u/s 234B of Rs.14,743 instead of Rs. 3,410 and Interest

Hira Manek Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 34(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2020-

ITA 8499/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

Sophos Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) challenging the non-grant refund of excess DDT as well as levy of interest u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) directed the Ld A.O to verify the claim of refund of DDT paid in excess ... rate of tax on dividends as prescribed under Article 10 of the DTAA between India and U.K. and also consequential interest u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act. However, the Ld. A.O. still rejected the claim of the assessee relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze

Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 2158/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2157/Ahd/2025 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2158/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gujarat Urban Development The Dy.Cit, बनाम/ Co.Ltd. Gandhinagar Circle V/S. Karmayogi Bhavan It Office Block-1, Udhyog Bhavan B 1 Wing, Ground Floor Sector-11 Sector-10A Gandhinagar – 382 010 Gandhinagar – 382 010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcg 1330 R (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Ukti Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr & Shri Arvind R. Kumbhare Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/012026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate and Ms. Ukti Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR and Shri Arvind R. Kumbhare Sr.DR

Section 234BSection 250Section 270A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “ए“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद