← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4658/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta
Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST U/S 234C INTEREST U/S 234C 50,511 50,511 49. GROSS DEMAND GROSS DEMAND 1,08,12,761 1,08,12,761 TAXES PAYMENT DETAILS TAXES

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4608/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta
Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST U/S 234C INTEREST U/S 234C 50,511 50,511 49. GROSS DEMAND GROSS DEMAND 1,08,12,761 1,08,12,761 TAXES PAYMENT DETAILS TAXES

Viacom 18 Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4606/MUM/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kanupriya Damor, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Moksha Mehta
Section 153(5)Section 244A

U/S 234A 0 46. DELAY PERIOD DELAY PERIOD 0 47. INTEREST U/S 234B INTEREST U/S 234B 16,44,035 16,44,035 48. INTEREST U/S 234C INTEREST U/S 234C 50,511 50,511 49. GROSS DEMAND GROSS DEMAND 1,08,12,761 1,08,12,761 TAXES PAYMENT DETAILS TAXES

Devidayal Aluminium Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 4610/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 221(1)

assessment year 2015-16 herein, and this date of transfer coming to 17.12.2015 to this clinching effect is not in dispute, the impugned interest u/s 234C read with 2nd proviso thereto, deserves to be restored back to the learned Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate computation and factual verification

Devidayal Aluminium Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 4609/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 221(1)

assessment year 2015-16 herein, and this date of transfer coming to 17.12.2015 to this clinching effect is not in dispute, the impugned interest u/s 234C read with 2nd proviso thereto, deserves to be restored back to the learned Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate computation and factual verification

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Rohitkumar Nemchand Piparia, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1344/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1344/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito Shri Rohitkumar Nemchand Piparia बनाम International Taxation Ward-2(1) #34 (Old #77), Meddox Street, / Vs. Chennai. Choolai, Chennai-600 112. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akzpp-0661-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar & Ms. Samyuktha Banusekar (Advocates) - Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar & Ms. SamyukthaFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 234C

held that the interest is not chargeable in this case u/s 234C. But, the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the charging of interest u/s 234C of the Act amounting to Rs.3,31,564/- which is actually for deferment of Advance tax. The above decision is contrary to the provisions ... since, the charging of interest u/s 234C emanate only from the existence of advance tax liability and also from the shortfall of advance tax payable by the assessee. To explain further, the interest u/s 234C is chargeable for the default in payment of installment(s) / shortfall of advance tax payable

Biocon Biologics Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1590/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavit(Tp)A No.1590/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

with the provisions of section 244A of the Act. 11. The Ld. AO has erred, in law and on facts in levying excess interest u/s 234C of the Act of INR 47,42,435. The Appellant submits that each of above grounds is independent and without prejudice to one another

Dr. Reddy S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 821/HYD/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P S R V V Surya Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234CSection 234DSection 35D

purpose of section 220 of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground of appeal pertaining to interest u/s 234C. 6. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground of appeal pertaining to interest u/s 234D. 7. Appellant reserves the right to add/modify any grounds

Dr. Reddy S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 820/HYD/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P S R V V Surya Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234CSection 234DSection 35D

purpose of section 220 of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground of appeal pertaining to interest u/s 234C. 6. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground of appeal pertaining to interest u/s 234D. 7. Appellant reserves the right to add/modify any grounds

Taurus Family Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO, 23(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 2557/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarvs. Ito, 23(3)(1) Taurus Family Trust Piramal Chambers, 4Th Floor, Grand Room No. 525A, 5Th Palladium, Kalina Floor, Lalbaug, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – Mumbai – 12 400098. Pan/Gir No. Aaatt4813C (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 234CSection 250

pressed by the assessee is ground No. 4, wherein the assessee challenged the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234C of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. DR has placed on record the clarification made by the department, wherein the department has clearly ... admitted that no interest u/s 234C of the Act for the year under consideration may be charged to the assessee. 4. In view of the said admission on the part of department this ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

Idfc Financial Holding Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-2(2), Hennai

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

ITA 241/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr.Ketan K. Ved, CAFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anita, Addl.CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234C

calculations of tax payable, interest, figures of income returned and other figures embodied in the return were accepted by the CPC Bangalore. Except, interest u/s 234C was enhanced by Rs 12, 31,304/- by CPC, Bangalore. M/s. IDFC Financial Holdings Co. Ltd. :: 5 :: 7. And the Tribunal has decided ... ITAT Jaipur bench in the case of M/s GIE Jewels (ITA No. 794/JP/2017), decided in the favour of charging interest u/s 234C of the Act. 8. We have analysed circular no.13, cases decided in favour of revenue (supra.) and relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A). This circular

Schaeffler India Limited, Vadodara, Gujarat vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore (Jao-Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle1(1)(1), Vadodara, Gujarat

ITA 692/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

genuine reasons. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 14. The brief issue for consideration before us is whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of late payment

The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Schaeffler India Ltd.( Erstwhile Luk India Pvt. Ltd)), Vadodara

ITA 299/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

genuine reasons. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 14. The brief issue for consideration before us is whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of late payment

Schaeffler India Ltd.(A Successor of Luk India Pvt. Ltd)), Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1) (Earlier ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur), Vadodara

ITA 275/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

genuine reasons. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 14. The brief issue for consideration before us is whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of late payment

Yashvardhan Jatia Trust, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer CPC, Banglore

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

ITA 2541/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT/DR
Section 10(35)Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 154Section 250

facts and circumstances of the case, the AO-CPC erred in charging interest u/s 234C of the Act at Rs. 76,590/- instead of Rs. NIL chargeable on the returned income. 5) The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend the Grounds of Appeal on or before

Schaeffler India Limited, Vadodara Gujarat vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, (CPC) Bangalore (Jao Ddcit Circle 1(1)(1) Vadodara, Vadodara Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1056/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 2Section 234BSection 234CSection 80G

learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s 234C of the Act. 17. Your Appellant craves the right to add to or to alter, amend, substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds

Sarika Tyagi, Ghazibad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghazaibad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1414/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. It is well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is to be made only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. The Ground No. 2 raised ... 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 29.2. The law is very well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is chargeable only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee

Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. It is well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is to be made only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. The Ground No. 2 raised ... 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 29.2. The law is very well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is chargeable only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1412/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. It is well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is to be made only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. The Ground No. 2 raised ... 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 29.2. The law is very well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is chargeable only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee

DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1387/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

interest u/s 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. It is well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is to be made only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. The Ground No. 2 raised ... 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 29.2. The law is very well settled that interest u/s 234C of the Act is chargeable only on the returned income and not on the assessed income. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee