Section 234F of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.428

Section 234F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 428 (Fee for default in furnishing return of income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 428 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 234F is Sonic Biochem Extractions (P.) Ltd. v. ITO ( (25 Taxmann.com 25), cited in 63 of the 131 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 234F

Sonic Biochem Extractions (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (
25 Taxmann.com 25 · 2012 · ITAT
63
citing judgments

Prior to the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. on October 15, 2011, the purchase of off-the-shelf software was not subject to TDS, and therefore, no disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) or 40(a)(ia) could be made.

CSC Technology Singapore Pte. Ltd. v. ADIT
19 Taxmann.com 123 · 2012 · High Court
12
citing judgments

Income is taxable in India if it accrues in India, irrespective of whether it contains a profit element. Taxability of royalty or fees for technical services (FTS) is determined based on their arising in India and payment to a resident of a contracting state under a DTAA.

Commissioner of Customs v. G.M. Exports
62 Taxmann.com 184 · 2015 · Supreme Court
4
citing judgments
JCIT (OSD) v. Merrill Lynch Capital Market Espana SA SV
112 Taxmann.com 119 · Reported
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 234F

Vivek Trivedi, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 42(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6613/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 270A(3)(i)Section 270A(6)(a)Section 270A(7)

Makaba Kariyappa Venkatesh, Chitradurga vs. ITO Ward-1, Chitradurga

In the result, ground no. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 925/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Sept 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: AYJPV9806G
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 234ASection 234BSection 234F

Expedia Lodging Partner Services Sarl, Switzerland vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(2)(2), International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA 1943/Del/2025 is partly allowed

ITA 1943/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Vikas Awasthy & Sh. Naveen Chandraexpedia Lodging Partner Vs. The Acit, Services Sarl Circle – 1(2)(2) Rue Du 31 – Decembre 40-42 International Taxation & 44-46 Geneva 1207, Delhi Switzerland - 999999 Pan No. Aaece 4467 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ravi Sharma & Ms. Shruti Khemta, Advs. Revenue By Dr. Shalini Verma, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.09.2026

Section 144C(5)Section 144C(6)Section 147Section 153Section 234ASection 234FSection 270A

Shankar Mallayya Vasal, Mumbai vs. ITO22(3)(6), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3837/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Rakesh Kumar Lodhaassessment Year: 2016-2017 Shankar Mallayya Income Tax Officer Vasal 22(3)(6) Room No.75 Poonawala Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Chawl No.2, Ganpatrao Parel, Mumbai, 400012 Vs. Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Maharashtra - Mumbai 400 013 Maharasthra

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

S M Electric Trading Co Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 454/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Sept 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R. L. Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Ms Ankita Lohani, AR and Shri G. SFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234F

Kusum Healthcare Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13(1), Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose, in the terms aforesaid

ITA 4309/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: AABCK7043B
Section 234ASection 35

Subbareddy Tippayagari, Kadapa vs. ITO, Ward-(1), Kadapa

ITA 139/HYD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Aug 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble & Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: AXWPT2001P
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234FSection 250Section 69A

Mahendra Kumar Sanwalka, Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1846/KOL/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(3)Section 250Section 3(1)Section 80

S A Gadagi, Ron vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward I, Gadag

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1629/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.A. Gadag Ron, A.RFor Respondent: Sri N. Balusamy, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 270A

Veeraganti Subbaraju Bhavana, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2545/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 249Section 250Section 69C

Vividoddhesha Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakar Sangh Niyamit, Alagawadi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Belagavi

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

ITA 250/PAN/2026[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Aug 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.250/Pan/2026 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vividoddhesha Prathamik Vs. Ito, Ward-2, Belagavi. Grameen Krushi Sahakar Sangh Niyamit, Alagawadi, Tal. Raibag, Belagavi- 591220. Pan : Aadap2936Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veeranna MurgodFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 234F

Shree Shankheshwar and F A, Mumbai vs. ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4065/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: ABVFS8269H
Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 250Section 253(5)

Abhishubham Bahadur Saxena, Jaipur vs. ITO Circle (Intl Tax), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 668/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Kuldip Singhabhishubham Bahadur Vs. Ito Saxena Circle (Intl Tax) 4Th Floor Jeevan Nidhi-2, D-101 Saraswati Nagar, Opposite Sector 6 & 7 Jaipur Malviya Nagar, Jaipur "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No:Braps 6976 F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Jitendra Agarwal, Ca Respondent By : Mrs. Aarti Rawat, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing 12.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2026

For Appellant: Sh. Jitendra Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Aarti Rawat, Addl. CIT
Section 270A(9)

Ntt India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 3 of the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6377/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal(Physicalhearing) Ntt India Private Limited Dcit – 14(1)(1), Mumbai Art Guild House, B Wing, 4Th Floor, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Unit No. Fof-B-08-10 & 10A, Mumbai – 400020. Phoenix Market City, Lbs Marg, Kurla West, Mumbai – 400070. [Pan: Aaacd2145G] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta, Ca & Ms. Maitri Pujara, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)Dated 09.10.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Ground No. 1: Transfer Pricing Adjustment Of Inr 112,92,51,158/-On Account Of Payment Of Management Fees: 1.1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon'Ble Dispute Resolution Panel ('Drp') / Learned Transfer Pricing Officer ('Ld. Tpo') / Learned Assessing Officer ('Ld. Ao') Have Erred, In Making Transfer Pricing Adjustment Of Inr 112,92,51,158/- To The Value Of International Transactions In Respect Of Payment Of Management Fees To Its Associate Enterprise ('Ae') I.E. Ntt Asia Pacific Holdings Pte. Ltd. ('Ntt Asia'). 1.2. The Hon'Ble Drp / Ld. Tpo/Ld. Ao Have Erred In Law By Considering Management Fees Paid As A Separate Class Of Transaction & Segregating It For Benchmarking Purposes. Ntt India Private Limited

Section 143(1)Section 254(1)Section 37

Neetu Singh, Unnao vs. Income Tax Officer, Unnao

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

ITA 652/LKW/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.652/Lkw/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19 Neetu Singh V. Income Tax Officer Nawabganj, Unnao-209801. Civil Lines, Unnao- 209801. Pan:Eizps3141H अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Jagdish, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Smt Pratibha Singh, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30 07 2026 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 31 07 2026 Pronouncement: O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt Pratibha Singh, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 234ASection 270ASection 69A

Mr. Rajesh R Hemrajani, Mumbai vs. ITO Int. Tax Ward 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1284/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Beena Pillai, Hon’Ble & Arun Khodpia, Hon’Ble

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234FSection 270A(8)Section 49Section 9(1)(ii)

Shalimar Co.Op. Housing Society Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 795/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Divyaknat Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 234ASection 234FSection 250Section 80P(2)(d)

Mr. Periyannan Madesha, Hale Kote, Jageri Sathegala Post, Hanur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3037/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. Periyannan Madesha, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hale Kote, Jageri Sathegala Post, Hanur, Ward 1, Kollegala Kollegal 571439, Chamarajanagara-571313, Karnataka Karnataka Pan : Bfdpm9475G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Siddesh Gaddi, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep S - Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.07.2026 O R D E R Per Balakrishnan S: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A) (Nfac, Delhi], Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025- 26/1081229782(1) Dated 26.09.2025, For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Arising Out Of The Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act, Dated 19.03.2024. 2. At The Outset, It Was Noticed That Assessee Has Filed An Appeal With A Delay Of 24 Days. The Assessee Stated In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay That The Order Passed By The Learned Cit(A) Dated 29.09.2025 Was Deemed To Been Received On The Same Date & The Assessee Ought To Have Page 2 Of 10

For Appellant: Shri. Siddesh Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep S - Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 194JSection 206CSection 69C

Cosmic Nutracos Solutions Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-5, Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 1035/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Krinwant Sahayassessment Year: 2022-23 Cosmic Nutracos Solutions Vs. Acit Private Limited Central Circle – 5 A-89, Okhla Phase-Ii, Okhla Delhi Industrial Estate, S.O. Tehkhand South East Delhi, New Delhi-110020 Pan No. Aadcc1133A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 148BSection 151Section 151ASection 37(1)

Nav Durga Construction Company, Vashi, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 27(2), Mumbai, Vashi, Navi Mumbai

ITA 2721/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarm/S. Nav Durga Ito-27(2) Construction Company Vashi Railway 234, 235 & 236 Big Splash Vs. Station Building Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Vashi, Navi Mumbai Raigad, Maharashtra-400 Maharashtra-400703. 703. Pan/Gir No. Aadfn0867H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 144BSection 147Section 194ISection 234FSection 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 271A(1)(d)Section 68Section 69A