← 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

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 7724/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

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

Sabre Glbl Inc., New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 559/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

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

Sabre Glbl Inc., New Delhi vs. DCIT (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 4838/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

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

Sabre Inc, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 216/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

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

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S. Sabre Glbl Inc., Gurgaon

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

ITA 6731/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

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

Udaykumar Prabhudas Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 29(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 883/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudaykumar Prabhudas Shah V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 29(3)(1) Kautilya Bhavan 1601 Moksh Mahal Bandra Kurla Complex P.K. Road, Sarvodaynagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 Mulund, Mumbai – 400080 Pan: Alyps8682D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Dharan Gandhi Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

Appellant the material relied upon and without granting any opportunity to cross examine the parties. 4. The Ld. AO has erred in levying interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act 5. The Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act 6. The Appellant

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1254/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

Developers Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 47 (Gujarat). In the said decision it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court that interest u/s 234B (A) was to be levied in respect of additional income offered for tax before the Settlement Commission. The relevant part of the order ... After perusal of the order passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 245D (4) of the Act, it is found that the AO has charged interest u/s 234B of the Act in the manner provided u/s 234B (2A) of the Act as directed by the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission vide order

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1253/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

Developers Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 47 (Gujarat). In the said decision it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court that interest u/s 234B (A) was to be levied in respect of additional income offered for tax before the Settlement Commission. The relevant part of the order ... After perusal of the order passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 245D (4) of the Act, it is found that the AO has charged interest u/s 234B of the Act in the manner provided u/s 234B (2A) of the Act as directed by the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission vide order

Demi Realtors, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

assessee by way of self assessment tax on 1st April, 2019. In that eventuality, there could not have been levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act, as interest u/s 234B of the Act has to be computed from first day of April following the financial year, for which, advance

Msk Project (India) Jv Ltd. Co.(Merged With Madhav Infra Project Ltd), Vadodara vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Vadodara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 Msk Project (India) Jv Ltd. Vs. (Merged With Madhav Infra Acit, Projects Ltd), Circle-4, 4, Madhav House, Near Baroda Panchratna Building, Subhanpura, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 1157 C अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.01.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Iii, Baroda [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 09.08.2012 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts To Hold That No Appeal Lies Against Order Giving Effect To Findings Of Cit In Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. 2. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts Dismissing Appeal Challenging Addition Of Rs.9,90,00,052/- Whereas Supreme Court Awarding Rs. 26.34 Lakhs

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250(6)Section 263

effect without giving adequate opportunity to the appellant to present documentary evidence that no such income accrued to the appellant. 4. Levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act is not justified.” 3. The appeal is stated to be barred by limitation by 2359 days

Navachetana Microfin Services Private Limited, Haveri vs. ACIT Circle 1, Davanagere

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

ITA 904/BANG/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar V., CAFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, JCIT DR
Section 68Section 69A

appellant's case. 17. Without prejudice to the right to see waiver with Honble CCIT / DGIT the appellant denies liability to be charged interest U/s 234B & 234C of the Act under facts in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 18. For the above and other grounds that

Sangam Resorts Private Limited, Manali vs. ITO, Ward, Kullu

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

ITA 343/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ranvijay Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 234BSection 271Section 271ASection 40

liabilities as alleged bogus liability. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in charging interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act without giving credit for seized cash. 13. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing

Give Foundation, Bangalore vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the primary matter involved in all the Assessment

ITA 795/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 234BSection 25Section 251(2)Section 270ASection 8

Effect: NIL, being technical ground. 9. Initiation of penalty u/s 270A is not justified, 10. Charging of Interest u/s 234B, 234C, 234D are” 3. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is directly covered by the order of ITAT Ahmedabad in assessee’s own cases

Ajit Kumar Patni, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-28(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 705/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(C)Section 68

added another sum of Rs. 7032/- being alleged as commission charged @ ½ per rupee on cheque amount of Rs. 14,06,404/- and calculate interest u/s 234B of the Act of Rs. 4,07,238/- upon the assessee. Similarly, the ld. AO added Rs. 6821/- u/s 234C of the Act upon ... hereby dismissed. 7. In ground no. 3, the assessee stated that the ld. CIT(A) erred in facts and in law charging interest u/s 234B of the Act of Rs. 4,07,238/- and Rs. 6821/- u/s 234C of the Act are not correct and view taken by the authorities

Ajit Kumar Patni, Kolkata vs. It0, WD-28(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 704/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(C)Section 68

added another sum of Rs. 7032/- being alleged as commission charged @ ½ per rupee on cheque amount of Rs. 14,06,404/- and calculate interest u/s 234B of the Act of Rs. 4,07,238/- upon the assessee. Similarly, the ld. AO added Rs. 6821/- u/s 234C of the Act upon ... hereby dismissed. 7. In ground no. 3, the assessee stated that the ld. CIT(A) erred in facts and in law charging interest u/s 234B of the Act of Rs. 4,07,238/- and Rs. 6821/- u/s 234C of the Act are not correct and view taken by the authorities

Somashekhar Virupax Umarami L/H Smt. Latharani . S Umarani, Hubballi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hubli

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

ITA 867/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15 Somashekhar Virupax Umarani L/H Smt. Latharani S. Umarani Umarani Annexe Behind Hosur Jain Temple, Ito Vs. Near Chetana Weigh Bridge Ncm Ward-2(4) Hubballi 580 029 Hubli Karnataka Pan No : Aadpu0417E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Subramanian S., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 25.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.01.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Cit(A) Dated 31.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 271ASection 68Section 69ASection 69B

illegal. 6. That there is no justification to demand total tax of Rs. 1,41,60,313/- including interest u/s 234B and 234C 7. That there is no justification to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271A, 271B, 271(1)(c )for A/Y 2014-15 under the facts and circumstances ... Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs. 4,85,44,095/- u/s 69A of the Act and taxed the same with Interest u/s 234B and 234C and demanded total Income Tax of Rs. 1,41,60,313/- for A.Y 2014-15. Aggrieved by the huge unwarranted addition

M/S. Bmm Ispat Limited, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 381/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Giriji G.P., A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Senthil Kumar N., D.R
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 250Section 68Section 92C

case laws relied on by the authorities below are not relevant and out of context. 11. The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. Further prays that the interest if any should be levied only on returned income. 12. No opportunity has been given before ... levy of interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. 13. Without- prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief in the levy of interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. M/s. BMM Ispat Limited, Bellary Page

Sheetal Prop. of Mnc Propmart, Gurgaon vs. JCIT, Range-2, Gurgaon

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

ITA 8980/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

Section 133(6)Section 234B

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not 3 reversing the action of the Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234B and 234D of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the assessee at the outset submits that the learned Commissioner

Sri Bhyraveshwara Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 855/BANG/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jan 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, JCIT DR
Section 234BSection 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80p

submits that the interest, if any, can be levied only on the returned income. 13. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. 14. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority the appellant begs for consequential relief ... levy of interest u/s 234B 15. For the above and other grounds and reason which may be adduced during the course of hearing of this appeal, the assessee requests that the appeal be allowed as prayed and justice be rendered.” 2. Brief facts of the case are as under

Toyota Kirloskar Motor Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 863/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Senthil Kumar N., D.R
Section 40A(2)

No.863/Bang/2023 M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 21 of 21 10.1 This ground is with regard to levy of interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act, which is consequential and mandatory in nature and to be calculated accordingly. 11. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly