← 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

Ubs Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assesse are partly allowed

ITA 5122/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.2261 & 5122/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14) Ubs Ag Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Level 3, 2 North Avenue Income Tax (It)-4(3)(1) Maker Maxity, Bandra Air India Building, Kurla Complex, Bandra Nariman Point East, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu5003G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dhanesh Bafna &For Respondent: Manoj Kumar
Section 234BSection 37(1)

point.” 14. Following the decision of the ITAT as supra we allow the appeal of the assessee. Ground No. 6. 15. Levy of interest u/s 234B & C is of consequential nature, therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Additional Ground No. 7 (Deduction for education cess) 16. This ground

Ubs Ag, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assesse are partly allowed

ITA 2261/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.2261 & 5122/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14) Ubs Ag Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Level 3, 2 North Avenue Income Tax (It)-4(3)(1) Maker Maxity, Bandra Air India Building, Kurla Complex, Bandra Nariman Point East, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu5003G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dhanesh Bafna &For Respondent: Manoj Kumar
Section 234BSection 37(1)

point.” 14. Following the decision of the ITAT as supra we allow the appeal of the assessee. Ground No. 6. 15. Levy of interest u/s 234B & C is of consequential nature, therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Additional Ground No. 7 (Deduction for education cess) 16. This ground

Arun Moreshwar Patil, Mumbai vs. ITO, 32(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 798/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sarun Moreshwar Patil, Ito-32(1)(2), G-2, Bhayandarkar Pratyakshkar Bhavan, बनाम/ Sadan, Ghratan Pada C-11, Room No.204, Vs. No.2, Sant Mirabai 2Nd Floor, Bandra Road, Dahisar (East), Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400068. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aodpp8017R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Roshan Patil.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Anil Gupta.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 22/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Proceedings Initiated U/S 147 By Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Is Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Roshan Patil.ARFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in charging an amount of Rs.5,57,163/- as interest u/s 234B of the Act. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or delete any or all of the grounds of appeal.” 3 Arun Moreshwar Patil

Hitesh Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2623/MUM/2022[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2023AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhvk-Vk-La- 2623@Eaqcbz@2022 ¼Fu-Oa- 1993&94½ Hitesh Shantilal Mehta 32, Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Floor, Dr. A. B. Road, Worli Mumbai-400 018 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Abapm4491J Cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Cc-4 (1) Room No.1916, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 021

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah &For Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, Special Counsel for Dept
Section 220Section 234B

adjusted against the demand for the year under consideration. In ground no. 6 of appeal, the assessee has assailed charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act. He submitted that ground no. 4, 5 and 6 of appeal can be restored back to the AO as there are calculation errors

Peacock Leasing P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 19(3), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 675/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 147Section 148Section 234B

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)’ erred in not allowing the appeal without considering that the assessee has to pay 81% interest u/s 234B for an un warranted addition. 7. The Appellant prays that the addition/ disallowance oLKs.221962/- as 3 error by Ld AO and Rs. 394898/- after providing due appeal

Fashinable Attire (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara

ITA 7664/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Shri DeepeshFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 145(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 234B

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 Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal ... they are left open. 14 ITAs No.7663 & 7664/Del/2019 ITAs No.7661 & 7662/Del/2019 12. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee is on the chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara Apparels

Fashinable Attire (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara

ITA 7663/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Shri DeepeshFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 145(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 234B

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 Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal ... they are left open. 14 ITAs No.7663 & 7664/Del/2019 ITAs No.7661 & 7662/Del/2019 12. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee is on the chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara Apparels

Fashionara Apparels (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara

ITA 7662/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Shri DeepeshFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 145(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 234B

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 Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal ... they are left open. 14 ITAs No.7663 & 7664/Del/2019 ITAs No.7661 & 7662/Del/2019 12. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee is on the chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara Apparels

Fashionara Apparels (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara

ITA 7661/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Shri DeepeshFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 145(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 234B

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 Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal ... they are left open. 14 ITAs No.7663 & 7664/Del/2019 ITAs No.7661 & 7662/Del/2019 12. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee is on the chargeability of interest u/s 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Fashionara Apparels

Lenient Consultants P.Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Noida

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

ITA 1704/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 251(1)Section 68

thereon in the hands of appellant company which is not sustainable. A massive demand has been raised by Imposing section 115BBE wrongly including Interest U/S 234B and 234C thereon, without appreciating the fact of the case and without appreciating and reckoning about the applicability of provision Section 68, Section 115BBE

I G International Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 146/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. Ground No. 5: 11. Levying of interest u/s 234B is consequential therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: (Erred in reopening assessment u/s 147 of the Act) 12. These grounds ... 146/Mum/2022 vide ground no. 4 as mutatis mutandis therefore, this ground of appeal is also dismissed. Ground No. 4: Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B: 19. Levying of interest u/s 234B as per law is consequential therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: Disallowance

I G. International P Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 145/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. Ground No. 5: 11. Levying of interest u/s 234B is consequential therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: (Erred in reopening assessment u/s 147 of the Act) 12. These grounds ... 146/Mum/2022 vide ground no. 4 as mutatis mutandis therefore, this ground of appeal is also dismissed. Ground No. 4: Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B: 19. Levying of interest u/s 234B as per law is consequential therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: Disallowance

I G International Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 144/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. Ground No. 5: 11. Levying of interest u/s 234B is consequential therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: (Erred in reopening assessment u/s 147 of the Act) 12. These grounds ... 146/Mum/2022 vide ground no. 4 as mutatis mutandis therefore, this ground of appeal is also dismissed. Ground No. 4: Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B: 19. Levying of interest u/s 234B as per law is consequential therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: Disallowance

I G International Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 143/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. Ground No. 5: 11. Levying of interest u/s 234B is consequential therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: (Erred in reopening assessment u/s 147 of the Act) 12. These grounds ... 146/Mum/2022 vide ground no. 4 as mutatis mutandis therefore, this ground of appeal is also dismissed. Ground No. 4: Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B: 19. Levying of interest u/s 234B as per law is consequential therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: Disallowance

I G International Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 142/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee stand dismissed. Ground No. 5: 11. Levying of interest u/s 234B is consequential therefore, this ground of appeal stand dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: (Erred in reopening assessment u/s 147 of the Act) 12. These grounds ... 146/Mum/2022 vide ground no. 4 as mutatis mutandis therefore, this ground of appeal is also dismissed. Ground No. 4: Regarding charging of interest u/s 234B: 19. Levying of interest u/s 234B as per law is consequential therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. Ground No. 1 & 2: Disallowance

Narsee Lal, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 415/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 234B

unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly delete the addition. 2 NARSEE LAL VS ITO, WARD 1(3), JAIPUR 2. That the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234D of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the appellant is wrong and bad in law. Kindly delete the same. 2.1 At the outset

Diamond Concrete Structures Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, 6(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 653/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2023AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

facts of the case by adding the retention money of Rs 37,60,671/-. 4. The Ld AO erred in charging interest u/s 234B and in initiating the penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, substitute, amend or modify

DCIT - 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Goenka Diamonds & Jewels Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3686/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kant

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234B

entire addition made by the AO. 4. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all grounds of appeal. 6. The appellant prays

DCIT - 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Goenka Diamonds & Jewels Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3685/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kant

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234B

entire addition made by the AO. 4. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all grounds of appeal. 6. The appellant prays

DCIT - 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Goenka Diamonds & Jewels Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3684/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kant

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234B

entire addition made by the AO. 4. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all grounds of appeal. 6. The appellant prays