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

Mr. Prakash Chand Agrawal, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO Ward-5(2)(1), Noida

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1300/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi19 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234F

Mr. Prakash Chand Agrawal, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO Ward-5(2)(1), Noida

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1299/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi19 May 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234F

Chandrasinh Bharatsinh Gohil, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 5(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 2216/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2026AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Ms. Nupur KumariFor Respondent: Ms.Neena Jeph,(CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 68

Chandrasinh Bharatsinh Gohil, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 5(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 2215/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Ms. Nupur KumariFor Respondent: Ms.Neena Jeph,(CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 68

Dhanjibhai Dayalbhai Chavda, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 357/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Virat Bhavsar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234FSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 50C

Mstc Ltd., New Town vs. ITO, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2414/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21 Mstc Ltd Ito, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri G. Bajerjee and A.N. Chatterjee, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR
Section 234F

The Simaliya Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Mandli Limited, Panchmahal vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

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

ITA 2442/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ananya Kulshresth, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 270ASection 69C

The Dantol Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Panchmahal vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1876/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1876/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 The Dantol Dudh Utpadak The Ito बनाम/ Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Ward-1 V/S. At – Dantol, Post – Bhilod Income Tax Office Tal – Ghoghamba Civil Lines Panchmahal – 389 341 Godhra – 389 341 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabat 9540 Q (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/04/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 13/05/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. The Dantol Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 270ASection 271A

Mehr Naz Co Op Housing Scy . Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25(2)(7), Mumbai

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

ITA 9437/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmehr-Naz Co-Op Ito Ward - 25(2)(1), Housing Scy. Ltd, Mumbai 91, Mehr Naz, Cuffe Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Parade, Mumbai – Mumbai. 400 005 Pan/Gir No. Aaaam1653Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Mr. Fenil Bhatt & Mr. Pankaj Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Smt. Usha Gaikwad, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Arham Anmol Projects Private Limited, Village Valshind, Bhiwandi vs. Circle 1 Kalyan, Kalyan, Thane

In the result, the legal grounds challenging the validity of the assessment are dismissed

ITA 5011/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokararham Anmol Projects Dcit Circle 1, Private Limited 2Nd Floor, Rani H. No. 1113, Ground Vs. Mansion, Murbad Floor, Arham Logiparc, Road, Kalyan Nh-3, Nashik Highway, (West), Thane, Village Valshind, Maharashtra – 421 Bhiwandi, Maharashtra – 301 421 302. Pan/Gir No. Aagca9644P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Subhash Bains, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 26.03.2026

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194ISection 234FSection 250

A K Enterprises, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 35(5), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6587/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 234Section 234ASection 270A

Timba Muvadi Dudh Mandali, Mahiasagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Lunawada

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1874/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Uday Kakne Kishanrao, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271ASection 69C

Kaidvana Muvada P Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandali Limited, Panchmahal vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

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

ITA 2325/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271ASection 69C

Mahaveer Singh, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 840/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234FSection 263(1)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 44A

The Vandeli Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Mandli Ltd, Panchmahal vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

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

ITA 1875/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr. D.R
Section 148Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271ASection 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Biliya Seva Sahkari Mandli Limited, Morbi, Rajkot vs. ITO Ward 1, Morbi

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

ITA 742/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 742/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Biliya Seva Sahkari Mandli Vs. Income Tax Office, Aayakar Limited Vibhag, J.K. Chamber, National At. Biliya, Tal. Morbi, Gujarat, Highway-8-A, At- Lalpar, Morvi 363641 (Gujarat) Morbi 363642 (Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabab3498H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 234FSection 253(5)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(d)

The Kara Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

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

ITA 2414/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra Kamblethe Kara Dudh Utpadak Sahkari The Income Tax Vs. Mandli Ltd. Officer, Kara Kanjipani Ward-1, Godhra Jambughoda Godhra – 389 001 Panchmahal – 389 390

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: -None-
Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 270A

Apaasso Mali, Pune vs. ITO 11(1), Swargate

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

ITA 1110/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 249Section 249(2)

Tungsten Automation England Ltd, United Kingdom vs. DCIT, Intl Taxation Circle-3(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1957/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 147Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

Salimahmed Umarganibhai Vahora, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1595/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalsalimahmed Umarganibhai The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Vahora, Ward-1(3)(1), Vahorawad Bazar, Vadodara. Nr. Nagar Palika, Padra, Vadodara-391440. [Pan :Ajbpv8394 C] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri M K Patel, Ar Respondent By: Shri Ravindra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271ASection 69A