← All Phrases

“interest u/s 234C”

InterestSection 234CSection 234C252 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest u/s 234C is DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC (313 ITR 187), cited in 144 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest u/s 234C

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.

Judgments citing interest u/s 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)

return of income. Further, interest u/s 234B of the Act was levied amounting to Rs.1,81,25,18,840 and also interest u/s 234C was recomputed to Rs.2,74,11,513. 4. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the AO, the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal

Borchers India Chemicals P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO-Ward-25(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1354/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Us: “1. (A) The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Jurisdiction Exercised By Centralized Processing Centre Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') Involving Allowability Of Claim On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employees' Contribution To Provident Fund (Under The Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952) Under Section 36(L)(Va) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 234BSection 234CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43b

allowed for statistical purposes. 5th Ground: Levy of excess interest of Rs.24,860/- u/s 234C of the Act: 9. The assessee has shown interest u/s 234C of the Act to the amount of Rs.54,834/- in the return of income, however, the assessing officer has computed the interest at Rs.79 ... intimation u/s 143(1). We direct the A.O to recomputed the interest u/s 234C after allowing deduction of payment of Rs.11,83,260/- towards employees contribution to the provident fund by the assessee, therefore, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Ground No. 1 of the assessee

Abb Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl..C.I.T., Bangalore

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

ITA 440/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 234CSection 234C(1)(a)

No.1 and 2 of the grounds of appeal filed before your Honours dated March 28, 2012, the Assessing Officer has erred in calculating interest u/s 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 2 ITA No.440/Bang/2012. M/s.ABB Limited. 3. The above ground is regarding calculation of interest u/s 234C ... table, wherein it is claimed that excess payment of advance tax for the 1st and the last quarter has been ignored while calculating interest u/s 234C of the I.T.Act. The table submitted by the learned AR is reproduced below :- Total advance tax required to be paid

M/S. R.R. Forgings Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 735/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Vishal S.RaoFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

liable to the same. 8. The learned CIT(Appeals) erred in sustaining the levy of the sum of Rs.65,351 as interest u/s 234C as the appellant is not liable to the same.” 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: For the assessment year 2019-2020, the return

Ab Sciex Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 1(1)(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 515/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O. P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Anupama Anand, CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 147Section 148

facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. A.O and the Hon’ble DRP both erred in levying interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 3. The assessee company is a non-resident company in the terms of Section 6 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee

Vinod Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 43(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7761/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Vinod Kumar, Vs. Ito, H.No.320, Kakrola Housing Ward-43(1), Complex, Karola More, New Delhi. Dk Mohan Garden, Uttar Nagar, New Delhi. Pan: Adtpv7972Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rattan Singh Yadav, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2021 Order

For Appellant: Shri Rattan Singh Yadav, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in charging interest u/s 234C of Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in charging interest u/s

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bhushan Energy Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and Cross-objection of assessee are dismissed

ITA 4640/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14A

lakh, and interest on FLC (foreign letter of credit) of Rs.2.30 crore and Rs.1.34 crore respectively in the above two assessment years beside interest u/s 234C and interest on TDS; that as per detailed explanation given in the foot notes of the audited accounts these loans are for various phases

Sumitomo Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1881/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Sumitomo Corporation Vs Dcit (International Taxation) G-195, Circle-3(1)(2) Sarita Vihar New Delhi New Delhi Aabcs6011P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 5

Ground No. 8 pertaining to interest under Section 234C of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has levied interest u/s 234C of the Act of Rs. 76,23,106/-. The Ld. AR submitted that the interest under Section 234C is leviable on default in payment ... assessee in payment 39 of advance tax as per returned income, such interest levied is highly erroneous. The Ld. AR submitted that interest u/s 234C of the Act is levied only when the assessee fails to deposit the tax based upon its return of income. As per the return

DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi vs. Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is partly allowed

ITA 5801/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Addl Cit (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Range-4, Unitech Trade Centre, New Delhi Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl Cit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Special Range-4, International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Circle-11(1), International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Dcit, (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Unitech Circle-11(1), Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block New Delhi C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Section 10ASection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

allocation of ₹ 31,798,275/– which is erroneous. The ground of appeal no 3 of initiation of the penalty proceedings and chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D were not pressed. Therefore, the solitary issues of the appeal of the assessee are with respect to allocation of expenditure between eligible ... premature at this stage and therefore same is dismissed. 19. Ground number 4 of the appeal is with respect to the chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D of the income tax act both are consequential in nature and therefore ground number 4 is dismissed. 20. The additional ground raised

Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is partly allowed

ITA 5770/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Addl Cit (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Range-4, Unitech Trade Centre, New Delhi Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl Cit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Special Range-4, International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Circle-11(1), International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Dcit, (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Unitech Circle-11(1), Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block New Delhi C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Section 10ASection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

allocation of ₹ 31,798,275/– which is erroneous. The ground of appeal no 3 of initiation of the penalty proceedings and chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D were not pressed. Therefore, the solitary issues of the appeal of the assessee are with respect to allocation of expenditure between eligible ... premature at this stage and therefore same is dismissed. 19. Ground number 4 of the appeal is with respect to the chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D of the income tax act both are consequential in nature and therefore ground number 4 is dismissed. 20. The additional ground raised

M/S. Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT (Inv.), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is partly allowed

ITA 6558/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Addl Cit (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Range-4, Unitech Trade Centre, New Delhi Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl Cit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Special Range-4, International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Circle-11(1), International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Dcit, (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Unitech Circle-11(1), Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block New Delhi C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Section 10ASection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

allocation of ₹ 31,798,275/– which is erroneous. The ground of appeal no 3 of initiation of the penalty proceedings and chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D were not pressed. Therefore, the solitary issues of the appeal of the assessee are with respect to allocation of expenditure between eligible ... premature at this stage and therefore same is dismissed. 19. Ground number 4 of the appeal is with respect to the chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D of the income tax act both are consequential in nature and therefore ground number 4 is dismissed. 20. The additional ground raised

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is partly allowed

ITA 6552/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Addl Cit (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Range-4, Unitech Trade Centre, New Delhi Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl Cit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Special Range-4, International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Honeywell Circle-11(1), International (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Unitech Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Honeywell International Vs. Dcit, (India) Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Unitech Circle-11(1), Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block New Delhi C, Sushant Lok Phase-I, Gurgaon Pan: Aanca7954K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Section 10ASection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

allocation of ₹ 31,798,275/– which is erroneous. The ground of appeal no 3 of initiation of the penalty proceedings and chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D were not pressed. Therefore, the solitary issues of the appeal of the assessee are with respect to allocation of expenditure between eligible ... premature at this stage and therefore same is dismissed. 19. Ground number 4 of the appeal is with respect to the chargeability of interest u/s 234C and 234D of the income tax act both are consequential in nature and therefore ground number 4 is dismissed. 20. The additional ground raised

Exlservice.Com(India) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Ltu, Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 8452/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

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

u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 32. Levy of interest is mandatory though consequential. However, in so far as levy of interest u/s 234C is concerned, we direct the Assessing Officer to levy interest on the returned income of the assessee. 33. By way of additional ground

Exlservices.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ltu, Circle- 1, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5436/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

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

u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 32. Levy of interest is mandatory though consequential. However, in so far as levy of interest u/s 234C is concerned, we direct the Assessing Officer to levy interest on the returned income of the assessee. 33. By way of additional ground

Exlservice.Com (India) P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Ltu, Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5435/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

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

u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 32. Levy of interest is mandatory though consequential. However, in so far as levy of interest u/s 234C is concerned, we direct the Assessing Officer to levy interest on the returned income of the assessee. 33. By way of additional ground

M/S. Shipra Estate Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Ghaziabad

In the result ground number 4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed and ground number [3]

ITA 740/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shipra Estate Ltd, Vs Acit, C/O. Pradeep & Co, Circle-2, Tax Advocates, Ghaziabad 7, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad Pan: Aaccs6116J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary [CIT]–DR
Section 234BSection 234CSection 80Section 80I

Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of the learned Assessing Officer in charging interest u/s 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. “ 03 The brief fact of the case shows that assessee is a builder company engaged in the business ... appeal of the assessee is allowed. 18 The 3rd ground of appeal is with respect to the charging of the interest u/s 234C of The Income Tax Act and 4 th ground of appeal is with respect to the charging of interest u/s 234B of the income

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi I vs. Anant Raj Industries P. Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 456 / 2008HC Delhi06 Feb 2009

Less Advance Tax -- -- 24,19,743 18,71,668 Add: Interest u/s 234B 2,31,376 1,64,666 Add: Interest u/s 234C 1,52,748 1,18,149 Tax + interest payable 28,03,867 21,54,483 Less: MAT credit 5,48,075 -- Total Tax + interest liability

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. C.J.International Hotels Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 453 / 2008HC Delhi06 Feb 2009

Less Advance Tax -- -- 24,19,743 18,71,668 Add: Interest u/s 234B 2,31,376 1,64,666 Add: Interest u/s 234C 1,52,748 1,18,149 Tax + interest payable 28,03,867 21,54,483 Less: MAT credit 5,48,075 -- Total Tax + interest liability

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi II vs. Leroy Somer & Controls India P.Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 407 / 2008HC Delhi06 Feb 2009

Less Advance Tax -- -- 24,19,743 18,71,668 Add: Interest u/s 234B 2,31,376 1,64,666 Add: Interest u/s 234C 1,52,748 1,18,149 Tax + interest payable 28,03,867 21,54,483 Less: MAT credit 5,48,075 -- Total Tax + interest liability

CIT vs. Ocl India Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 1063 / 2007HC Delhi06 Feb 2009

Less Advance Tax -- -- 24,19,743 18,71,668 Add: Interest u/s 234B 2,31,376 1,64,666 Add: Interest u/s 234C 1,52,748 1,18,149 Tax + interest payable 28,03,867 21,54,483 Less: MAT credit 5,48,075 -- Total Tax + interest liability