← All Phrases

“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
21
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
19
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
14
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
14
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
13
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
12
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
11
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

A.T. Kearney Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 498/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

270A of the Act. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in computing interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to alter. amend. or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal herein ... Ground No. 5 is allowed for statistical purposes. 17. Ground No. 6 is premature. 18. Ground No. 7 relates to charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 19. Charging of interest is mandatory though interest u/s 234 C has to be charged on the returned income

A.T Kearney Ltd -India, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Circle International Taxation 1(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2257/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

270A of the Act. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in computing interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to alter. amend. or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal herein ... Ground No. 5 is allowed for statistical purposes. 17. Ground No. 6 is premature. 18. Ground No. 7 relates to charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 19. Charging of interest is mandatory though interest u/s 234 C has to be charged on the returned income

Dr. Vijay Prakash Khichar, Sikar vs. Income Tax Officer W(4) Sikar, Sikar

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeisallowed for statistical purpose

ITA 52/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vaishnavi Joshi (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68

erred in law as well as in facts of the case in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C, 234D. The levy interest being charged, is contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 6. The appellant prays your honor 6. indulgences

DCIT, Central Circle 30, New Delhi vs. Prakash Industries Ltd, Hissar

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1929/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Vs. Prakash Industries Ltd. Central Circle 30 15 Km Stone Delhi Road, New Delhi Hisar, Haryana – 125044 Pan No.Aabcp6765H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. P N Barnwal, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate Ms. Ayushi Gupta, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 29/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/03/2024 Order Per N. K. Billaiya, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Preferred Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 21.04.2023 Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12. 2. The Grievance Of The Revenue Read As Under :-

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 234Section 234B

234B and 234C of the IT Acct is applicable in the case of the assessee. Hence, the assessee company was liable to pay interest u/s. 234B and 234C at the time of filing of return of u/s. 139 (1) of the Income Tax Act or after the demand has been ... result of processing of return u/s. 143 (1) of the I. T. Act. 11. Scrutiny of the records revealed that the interest u/s. 234B and 234C was not charged and the assessee company had not paid demand created u/s. 154 / 143 (1). 12. As the mistake is apparent from record

DCIT, Central Circle 30, New Delhi vs. Prakash Industries Ltd, Hissar

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1928/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT- DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 234B

appellate authority. 12. The Assessing Officer processed the revised return on 31.03.2010 u/s 143(1) of the Act wherein he charged interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. This intimation was challenged before the ld. CIT(A) who set aside the order holding that after section ... vide order dated 06.07.2017. Now the Assessing Officer wants to rectify this order giving appeal effect by introducing a new issue of charging interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 15. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has exceeded his jurisdiction by rectifying appeal effect order for charging

DCIT, Central Circle 30, New Delhi vs. Prakash Industries Ltd, Hissar

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1927/DEL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT- DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 234B

appellate authority. 12. The Assessing Officer processed the revised return on 31.03.2010 u/s 143(1) of the Act wherein he charged interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. This intimation was challenged before the ld. CIT(A) who set aside the order holding that after section ... vide order dated 06.07.2017. Now the Assessing Officer wants to rectify this order giving appeal effect by introducing a new issue of charging interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 15. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has exceeded his jurisdiction by rectifying appeal effect order for charging

Eastern Drug & Sanitary Product, Meerut vs. Pr, CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1110/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganesh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M

M/S. Prakash Industries Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Hisar

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

ITA 1389/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 205(1)(b)Section 234B

facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that notwithstanding the mandatory nature of interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act, the law of the land requires the Assessing Officer to charge interest u/s 234B & 234C by specific and clear order ... facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred not appreciating that mandatory nature of charging interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act, and actual charging of interest by application of mind are two different things. 3. That on the facts and circumstances

Sri. Krishnappa Satish Kumar, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(1), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 731/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, JCIT (DR)
Section 139Section 153ASection 153CSection 234BSection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)

noted that as per the return of income filed by the assessee, there was tax liability at Rs.1,08,81,229/- excluding the interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act and the TDS amount claimed by the assessee is at Rs.1,10,514/- and it Page

Manoj Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2332/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 234ASection 234BSection 69

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the authorities have erred in charging interest u/s 234A & interest u/s 234B. The action of the authorities are wrong, illegal, misconceived, unjustified and bad at law therefore it should be quashed.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that

Manoj Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2331/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 234ASection 234BSection 69

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the authorities have erred in charging interest u/s 234A & interest u/s 234B. The action of the authorities are wrong, illegal, misconceived, unjustified and bad at law therefore it should be quashed.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that

Mobase India Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 243/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumara.Y. : 2016-17 Mobase India Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Acit, 1C, Front Part Of Front Building, National E-Assessment Centre, Udyog Vihar, Ecotech-Ii, Greater New Delhi. Noida 201306, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecd 8832 G Assessee By : Sh. Rajesh Dua, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 06.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.02.2024

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Dua, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 2Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43(6)Section 43B

which the assessee has duly done following the provisions of section 43(6). D- Other Grounds 8. Levy of Interest U/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act 1961 The AO/DRP/National e-Assessment Center New Delhi erred in charging of interest under the provision of section 234B, 234C

Crosseas Capital Services Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT(Central)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 3420/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Crosseas Capital Assistant Commissioenr Of Services P. Ltd., Income Tax (Central Suite 37, 5Th Floor, Circle)-2(4), Martin Burn House, Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, 1 Rn Mukherjee Road, Pratishtha Bhavan, Kolkata, Old Cgo Annexe, West Bengal - 700 001 Maharishi Karve Road, Pan: Aaccc5470H Mumbai – 400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. & Shri Maneck Andhyarujina, Ar. Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : All These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19 &

For Appellant: Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. &For Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R
Section 234BSection 250Section 37(1)

deserves to be deleted. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act on the Appellant. 4 ITA No.3417/M/2023 & ors. M/s. Crosseas Capital Services P. Ltd. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend

Crosseas Capital Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3419/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 234BSection 250Section 37(1)

deserves to be deleted. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act on the Appellant. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete all or any of the grounds

Crosseas Capital Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Central-2(4), Mumba

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 3418/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Crosseas Capital Assistant Commissioenr Of Services P. Ltd., Income Tax (Central Suite 37, 5Th Floor, Circle)-2(4), Martin Burn House, Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, 1 Rn Mukherjee Road, Pratishtha Bhavan, Kolkata, Old Cgo Annexe, West Bengal - 700 001 Maharishi Karve Road, Pan: Aaccc5470H Mumbai – 400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. & Shri Maneck Andhyarujina, Ar. Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : All These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19 &

For Appellant: Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. &For Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R
Section 234BSection 250Section 37(1)

deserves to be deleted. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act on the Appellant. 4 ITA No.3417/M/2023 & ors. M/s. Crosseas Capital Services P. Ltd. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend

Crosseas Capital Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Central -2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3417/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R
Section 234BSection 250Section 37(1)

deserves to be deleted. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act on the Appellant. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete all or any of the grounds

ACIT, CC-01, New Delhi vs. Harisons Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 2012/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri GautamJain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 44ASection 68

principles of natural justice, apart from being without jurisdiction. 9 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in levying interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act which are not leviable on the facts of the instant case. 10 That the appellant craves leave to reserve

Harisons Diamonds Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-1, Delhi

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

ITA 1426/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri GautamJain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 44ASection 68

principles of natural justice, apart from being without jurisdiction. 9 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in levying interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act which are not leviable on the facts of the instant case. 10 That the appellant craves leave to reserve

Sunil Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-47(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 2699/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 234BSection 68

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of the Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. The only effective ground of assessee in this appeal is in respect of sustaining the addition

Sabre Glbl Inc., New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation), Circle- 3(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 6040/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 216/Del/2016, A.Y. 2012-13 Ita No. 559/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 4838/Del/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7724/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 6040/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Sabre Glbl Inc. Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Tax, Adv. Circle-3(1)(2), C/O. Ms Associates, International Tax F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaact7216Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sabre Glbl Inc. Income Tax, Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. International Taxation, C/O. Ms Associates, New Delhi F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 Pan : Aaact7216Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

expenses incurred in earning the revenue allegedly attributable to the PE. 5. That on facts and in law the AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act. 6. That on facts and in law the AO erred in allowing credit