“interest under section 234C”

InterestSection 234CSection 234C353 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest under section 234C is CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1), cited in 452 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest under section 234C

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

252 ITR 1 · 2001 · Supreme Court

452

citing judgments

Levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Tax statutes are to be interpreted strictly, allowing no room for purposive interpretation.

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court

422

citing judgments

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

CIT v. Cotton Naturals (I) (P.) Ltd.

55 Taxmann.com 523 · 2015 · High Court

273

citing judgments

The interest rate for benchmarking foreign currency loans advanced to Associated Enterprises should be the market-determined rate applicable to the currency of the loan, such as LIBOR for US Dollar loans, rather than a domestic lending rate like the Indian PLR.

Karanvir Singh Gossal v. CIT

349 ITR 692 · 2012 · Supreme Court

158

citing judgments

The Supreme Court's decision establishes principles or grounds for seeking a waiver of mandatory interest levied under Sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

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. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.

56 Taxmann.com 206 · 2015 · High Court

119

citing judgments

When determining the arm's length price for interest on a foreign currency loan advanced to an Associated Enterprise, the Indian Prime Lending Rate is not applicable. Instead, the interest rate should be benchmarked based on the prevailing foreign currency rate, such as EURIBOR, or the rate in the country where the loan is received/consumed.

CIT v. Pfizer Ltd.

330 ITR 62 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

An insurance claim received on stock in trade constitutes business income and is not an independent source of income.

Pr. CIT v. Ankit Metal & Power Ltd.

109 Taxmann.com 93 · 2019 · High Court

citing judgments

Capital receipts, such as interest and power subsidy, are not includible in book profit under Section 115JB as they do not fall within the definition of income under Section 2(24).

Judgments citing interest under section 234C

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1716/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 115Section 44Section 80G

interest under section 234B of the Act 23. erred in confirming levy of interest under section 234B of the Act; Charging of interest under section 234C of the Act 24. erred in confirming levy of interest under section 234C of the Act. M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India Charging

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1715/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 115Section 44Section 80G

Implenia Services and Solutions, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -Circle-3(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1226/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Kavitha Rajagopal () Implenia Services & Solutions Pvt Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ltd, 401, Embassy Centre, Nariman Tax, Circle 34), Mumbai Point, Mumbai-400 021 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pan : Aabci2382R Mumbai. Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 4

heard the rival submissions and perused the materials on record, it is observed that the assessee has challenged the ground of levy of interest under section 234C of the Act of Rs.4,24,80,680/- levied by the Assessing Officer. The Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the said appeal ... observation, we are of the view that the Ld.CIT(A) has inadvertently dismissed the assessee’s appeal challenging the ground of levy of interest under section 234C of the Act instead of dismissing the appeal filed by the erstwhile EACHL. 6. From the above observation, we deem

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)

giving effect to the taxes deducted at source. Ground 7: Calculation of Interest on resulting adjustment The learned AO erred in charging the interest under section 234C as consequential in nature and not on the returned income. 2. This appeal was heard along with assessee’s appeal

Orient Overseas Container Line Limited, Mumbai vs. Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 826/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleorient Overseas Container Line Limited V. Dcit(It)-3(2)(2) C/O. Oocl (India) Private Limited 16Th Floor Icc Chambers, 5Th Floor Air India Building Saki Vihar Road, Opp. Santogen Silk Mills Nariman Point Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaaco5679E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Tiwari Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 154Section 234CSection 44B

rectify the mistakes apparent from record and grant the credit of balance advance tax of Rs. 6,29,099. 3. Incorrect levy of interest under Section 234C of the Act 3.1 Your goodself has computed interest under section 234C of the Act at Rs. 8,60,814. 3.2 In view ... Appellant in the return of income, thereby short grant of advance tax credit by Rs. 6,29,099. ERRONEOUS LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234C OF RS. 8,60,814 4. Erred in levying interest under Section 234C of the Act amounting to Rs. 8,60,814, without appreciating that

Hamilton Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO -WD 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 218/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Hamilton Industries Pvt. Ltd. Unit No. 8 & 9, Ground Floor, Kakad, Chamber, 132, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018. Pan: Aaach0375E ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward 7(1)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Piyush Chhajed, C.A Respondent By : Sh. Prasoon Kabra Date Of Hearing : 18/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Chhajed, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Prasoon Kabra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 208Section 234CSection 250Section 44A

gains earned by her after 15-3-2000 when date of payment of last instalment of advance tax had already expired - Assessee paid interest under section 234C for period of one month, until said liability was discharged in April 2000 - Assessing Officer held that assessee was liable to pay interest ... payment of advance tax instalment in earlier date may not attract interest. As far as income under the head business/profession is concerned, interest under section 234C of the Act shall not be chargeable on default in payment of advance tax in respect of such income only in the first year

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT(It) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5129/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

234C of the Act The learned AO erred in computing consequential interest under section 2348 of the Act as well as consequential interest under section 234C of the Act. Each of the grounds of appeal is referred to separately, and may kindly be considered independent of each other

Thomson Reuters International Services Private Limited(Succesor in Interest to Thomsan Reuters International Services Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 3127/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Asawari KadamFor Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 220Section 234BSection 234CSection 92C

Assessing Officer erred in consequently levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 5. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in consequently levying interest under section 234C of the Act. 6. That the learned Assessing Officer has failed to obtain the permission of joint Commissioner of Income- tax as required

Polycom Technology ( R & D ) Center P. Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Cir 7(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2067/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Lohia & Shri MihirFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

appellant vis-à-vis the comparable companies, Interest under Section 234B: 14. erred in levying interest under Section 234B of the Act, Interest under Section 234C: 15. erred in levying interest under Section 234C of the Act: Erroneous initiation of penalty proceedings 16. erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section

Wm Global Sourcing India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 450/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Rashmi R, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

erred in relying upon certain judicial precedents which are distinguishable in law and facts of the present case. 2. Erroneous levy of interest under section 234C of the Act 2.1. The Learned CIT(A) and Learned ADIT, CPC has erred in not appreciating that interest under section 234C

Fortive India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Appellant is partly allowed

ITA 443/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U Matkarni

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

stands deleted. In view of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3.1 and 3.5 are disposed off as being infructuous. 10. Ground No.4 pertaining to interest under Section 234C is disposed of as being consequential. 11. Ground No. 5 is disposed off as being general in nature. 12. In the result, appeal

Xchanging Solutions Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, grounds 20 to 23 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 294/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 May 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkaihalli, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 40

under Section 2348 of the Act. 27.The learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in computing interest under Section 234C of the Act, on the assessed income at INR 3,65,641 as against Nil computed on the returned income by the Appellant while filing its return ... income. 28.The learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, by not appreciating that interest under Section 234C of the Act is to be calculated on returned income and not on assessed income. The Appellant submits that each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice

M/S Belgacom International Carrier Services Sa, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1) International Taxation, Bangalore

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

ITA 2884/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 2884/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Belgacom The Deputy International Carrier Commissioner Of Services Sa, Income Tax, Rue Lebeau 4, Circle -1(1), 1000 Brussels, International Taxation, Vs. Belgium. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri V. Sridharan, Senior Assessee By Advocate : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr & Revenue By Smt. Vandana Sagar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Non Resident Assessee Against Order Dated 30.10.2017 Passed By Dcit (It), Circle -1(1), Bangalore On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Being Aggrieved By The Order Of The Learned Dcit, Circle - 1(1), International Taxation, Bengaluru ('A0'), Read With The Order Of The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel ('Drp*), Bengaluru, The Assessee Begs To Prefer The Present Appeal On The Following Grounds: 1. The Learned Ao Erred In Exercising, Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act In The Case Of The Appellant. 2. The Lower Authorities Erred In Holding That A Sum Of Rs. 6,87,13,119/- Received By The Appellant From Its Customer In India Is In The Nature Of 'Royalty' Within The Meaning Of Section 9(1)(Vi) Of The It Act & Accordingly Taxable In India Under The It Act.

For Respondent: Shri V. Sridharan, Senior

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

levy of tax itself has arisen only due to a retrospective amendment in the IT Act. 10. The lower authorities erred in levying interest under section 234C of the IT Act in the case of the Appellant, as according to the Revenue Authorities. the paver was liable to withhold

Strides Pharma Science Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 15 (3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7992/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi a/w Ms. Akshita BhandariFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

allowed for statistical purpose. 50. The issue arising in ground no.11, raised in assessee’s appeal is with regard to levy of interest under section 234C of the Act. 51. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from the record are: The Assessing Officer vide ... under section 234C of the Act. 52. During the course of hearing, the learned A.R. submitted that the interest under section 234C of the Act only be charged on the basis of tax due on the “returned income”. However, the Assessing Officer has charged interest under section 234C

M/S. United Spirits Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2701/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(iii)

learned AO has erred in computing interest under section 234B which is consequential to the above grounds of appeal. 10. Excess levy of interest under section 234C of the Act - Rs.402,730 10.1. The learned AO has erred in computing interest under section 234C of the Act without appreciating