← 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

Aniruddha N. Malpani, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC - 3 (2), Mumbai

ITA 3924/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

charges, STT and other expenses as deduction while computing the business income. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not setting aside the action of the Ld. AO in initiating penalty

Anjali A. Malpani, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 3917/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

charges, STT and other expenses as deduction while computing the business income. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not setting aside the action of the Ld. AO in initiating penalty

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 584/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B

being erroneous, both on facts and law applicable, is to be allowed. 4. The learned DCIT (CPC) has erred in levying interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The action of the DCIT(CPC) being erroneous, both on facts and law. is to be negated and the interest levied

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 563/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B

being erroneous, both on facts and law applicable, is to be allowed. 4. The learned DCIT (CPC) has erred in levying interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The action of the DCIT(CPC) being erroneous, both on facts and law. is to be negated and the interest levied

Asst. Comm. of Income Tax-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Exxon Mobile Company Pvt Ltd., Mumbai-400022

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross-

ITA 1283/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S Exxon Mobile Company Tax, Office Of The Asstt. Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Kalpataru Point, Plot No. 107, 6(1)(1), Room No. 504, Aayakar Road No. 8, Sion (East), Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 3157 H Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 113/Mum/2022 (Ita No. 1283/Mum/2022) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Exxon Mobile Company Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Office Of The Asstt. Kalpataru Point, Plot No. 107, Road Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax No. 8, Sion (East), 6(1)(1), Room No. 504, Mumbai-400020. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 3157 H Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Samruddhi Hande, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Paras Savla, Adv. A/W Mr. Dhiraj Jain Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Paras Savla, Adv. a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande, DR
Section 195Section 40

justified in not case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in not appreciating that the interest u/s 234B is calculated on appreciating that the interest u/s 234B is calculated on appreciating that the interest u/s 234B is calculated on the basis of assessed total income the basis

Spe India Films Holding Llc, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Intl Tax) -4(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result ground no-2 raised by the assessee- is fully allowed

ITA 457/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalspe India Films Holding Llc C/O, Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp One International Centre, Tower No.3, 27Th Floor-32Nd Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road (W), Mumbai-400013. Pan: Aaocs1827L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit (International Taxation)-4(2)(2) 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Narimaon Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. P.J. Pardiwala/Paras Savla Respondent By : Sh. A.K. Keshari Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Drp’] Dated 06.01.2022 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Appellant, Objects To The Order Dated 19 January 2022 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) Passed By The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 4(2)(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Sh. P.j. Pardiwala/Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Keshari
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)

raised by the Assessee is allowed. 10. Ground No-4 19 ITA No. 457 Mum 2022-SPE India Films Holding LLC Interest u/s 234B is consequential in nature and its quantification depends on the outcome of directions given supra against ground no-1. As far as interest u/s 234C ... returned figure hence, the same is liable to be deleted. AO is directed to delete the interest u/s 234C and recompute the interest u/s 234B keeping in view our findings in Ground 1, 2 and 3. In the result Ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Ntt Asia Pacific Holdings Pte.Ltd Formerly Known As Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(International Tax) 2(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1781/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.1781/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2019-20) Ntt Asia Pacific Holdings Pte Ltd. (Formerly Known As Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd.) C/O. Dhruva Advisors Llp 1101 & 1102, 11Th Floor, One World Centre, Tower 2B, 841 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai 400 013. Pan: Aadcd – 4348-L ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(1)(2), Room No.1612, 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Sunil Moti Lala ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/09/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Moti LalaFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)

Hence, ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. 7. In ground No.3 of appeal, the assessee has assailed charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act. Interest u/s. 234B of the Act is mandatory and consequential hence, ground No.3 of the appeal is dismissed. 8. In ground

Titan Industries Limited, Hosur vs. JCIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2239/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana (Sr. Advocate) for Ms. Manasa Ananthan (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92A(1)

Apportionment of Expenses including depreciation on trademark to compute deduction u/s 80-IC; (vi) Nature of Application Software expenditure; (vi) TDS Credit; & (vii) Interest u/s 234B / 234C. 4. Transfer Pricing Adjustment of Interest and Royalty 4.1 Since the assessee carried out certain international transactions with its Associated Enterprises ... directed to verify the TDS claim and grant TDS credit in accordance with law. 10. In ground No.7, the assessee assails computation of interest u/s 234B / 234C which is merely consequential in nature and do not require specific adjudication. No other ground has been urged before us. 11. The appeal

ADIT (It)-3(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nagase & Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2312/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharashi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest u/s 234B of the Act levied by the AO for short payment of advance tax. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds

M/S. Nagase & Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (I.T) - RG.-3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1805/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharashi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest u/s 234B of the Act levied by the AO for short payment of advance tax. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds

M/S. Nagase & Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (I.T) - RG.-3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1803/MUM/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharashi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest u/s 234B of the Act levied by the AO for short payment of advance tax. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds

The ADIT(It)-3(2), Mumbai vs. M/.S Nagase & Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 343/MUM/2006[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharashi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest u/s 234B of the Act levied by the AO for short payment of advance tax. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds

M/S. Nagase & Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT(A) Xxxiii, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 118/MUM/2006[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharashi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest u/s 234B of the Act levied by the AO for short payment of advance tax. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds

Devappa Muniraju, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 981/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vishal S. Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad K., Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 234BSection 48Section 54B

even when the Appellant is not liable for the same. 4. The Learned First Appellate Authority erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act even when the Appellant is not liable for the same. 5. The Learned First Appellate-Authority erred in upholding the levy

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 510/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

capital gains as the commission paid u/s 69C of the Act merely on surmise. 23. The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. Further prays that the interest if any should be levied only on returned income. 24. The appellant denies the liability ... levy of. interest u/s 234D is against the express provisions of law. 25. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 26. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 509/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

capital gains as the commission paid u/s 69C of the Act merely on surmise. 23. The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. Further prays that the interest if any should be levied only on returned income. 24. The appellant denies the liability ... levy of. interest u/s 234D is against the express provisions of law. 25. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 26. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 508/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

capital gains as the commission paid u/s 69C of the Act merely on surmise. 23. The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. Further prays that the interest if any should be levied only on returned income. 24. The appellant denies the liability ... levy of. interest u/s 234D is against the express provisions of law. 25. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 26. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 507/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

capital gains as the commission paid u/s 69C of the Act merely on surmise. 23. The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act. Further prays that the interest if any should be levied only on returned income. 24. The appellant denies the liability ... levy of. interest u/s 234D is against the express provisions of law. 25. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 26. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief

Cifco Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 489/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

rejected such change, (4) disallowance of ₹ 397,332 with respect to the amount written off. Assessee is also aggrieved with the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the act. 97. The brief facts of the case show that assessee filed return of income for assessment year ... allowed and AO is directed to delete the disallowance of ₹ 397,332/–. 104. Ground number 5 with respect to the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C is consequential, no arguments were advanced, and hence, it is dismissed. 105. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Cifco Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 488/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

rejected such change, (4) disallowance of ₹ 397,332 with respect to the amount written off. Assessee is also aggrieved with the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the act. 97. The brief facts of the case show that assessee filed return of income for assessment year ... allowed and AO is directed to delete the disallowance of ₹ 397,332/–. 104. Ground number 5 with respect to the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C is consequential, no arguments were advanced, and hence, it is dismissed. 105. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for assessment year