Section 234B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.424

Section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 424 (Interest for defaults in payment of advance tax) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 424 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 234B is Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (328 ITR 81), cited in 1,183 of the 10,214 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 234B

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. v. CIT
432 ITR 471 · 2021 · Supreme Court
914
citing judgments

Payments for the supply or use of computer software, where there is no transfer of copyright but only a right to use the copyrighted product, are generally considered business profits and not 'royalty' or 'fees for technical services' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 or relevant DTAAs. This principle also applies to transponder fees, which are not taxable as royalty.

CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
349 ITR 98 · 2012 · High Court
818
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 10A, if communication or telecommunication expenses are excluded from export turnover, they must also be excluded from total turnover to maintain consistency and apply the ordinary meaning of 'turnover' in context.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
263 ITR 706 · 2003 · Supreme Court
691
citing judgments

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty
128 ITR 294 · 1981 · Supreme Court
628
citing judgments

When the cost of acquisition of a capital asset cannot be determined, the computation mechanism for capital gains fails, and thus no capital gains can be charged. This establishes a broader principle that a charging section cannot operate in the absence of specific machinery provisions for computation.

Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT
124 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
622
citing judgments

Expenditure is classified as revenue or capital based on its practical business effect, necessity, or expediency, rather than solely on the juristic classification of rights; an enduring benefit does not automatically make an expenditure capital if it facilitates trading operations or business efficiency.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
366 ITR 408 · 2014 · High Court
519
citing judgments

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

Judgments on Section 234B

Shri Ganesh Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 196/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.196/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Ganesh Urban V The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society S Ward-1(1), Aurangabad. Limited, Main Market, Sarafa Galli, Sillod, Auranbabad – 431112. Pan: Aagas6006D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 05.12.2023 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “Being Aggrieved By The Order Of Ld. Cit (A), Income Tax Department, Nfac U/S. 250 Of The It Act, 1961 Vide Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058480083(1), Dated 05/12/2023. The Said Order Is Passed By Dismissing Appeal Filed By The Appellant Society Against The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Ward 1(4), Aurangabad, [Now Ward 1(1), Aurangabad] Hence The Appellant Society Shri Ganesh Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 69ASection 80Section 80P(2)(a)

Mhasimata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Ltd, Dhule vs. ITO, Ward1, Dhule

ITA 881/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.881/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mhasimata Mahila Gramin V The Income Tax Officer, Bigar Sheti Sahakari S Ward-1, Dhule. Pathsanstha Limited, Nizampur Sakri, Dhule- 424305. Pan: Aaeam9576E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hemant Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal(Addl/Jcit)(A)-5, Kolkata U/Sec.250 Of The Act Dated 27.02.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned A.O Has Grossly Erred In Disallowing The Deduction Claimed U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 In Respect Of Interest Received Of Rs. 4,12,160/ From Central Bank Of India & Dena Bank, Which Is A Attributed To The Part Of Business Income & Hence Appellant Is Eligible For The Deduction. Therefore, Finding Of The Learned A.O Be Vacated & Due Deduction U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) Of The I T Act May Please Be Allowed. Mhasimata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Limited [A]

Section 208Section 234Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)

M/S. Alang Metal Exim Pvt. Limited., Bhavnagar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 2329/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Alang Metal Exim Pvt.Ltd. The Acit Shop No.3, Arpan Flat Vs Circle-1 Shishuvihar Circle, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar – 364 001 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaeca 9651 Q ….. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13 /06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20-9-2018 Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–6, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”] In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.7,00,00,000/- Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) & Disallowance Of Rs.3,30,000/- Out Of Loading & Unloading Charges Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”) In His Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. M/S.Alang Metal Exim Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68