Loading...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (9) TMI 368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessment order dated 10 February 2021 passed by the National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi, which assessed total income at the returned income of Rs.436,982,823 but charged interest of Rs.700,499 under section 234C for deferment of advance tax against the actual interest chargeable of Rs 56047/-. The appeal was dismissed. Thus, the assessee is aggrieved only by the incorrect levy of interest under section 234C of the Act, although the issue is set out across five grounds of appeal. 2. We have heard the Ms. Suman Lunkar, CA authorised representative of the assessee, and Shri Pradeep S the Senior Departmental Representative, an Additional Commissioner of Income Tax. 3. Briefly, the appellant is an individual resident in India. The assesse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 1 to section 234B, which excludes TDS, relief under sections 90 and 91, and other specified credits. Interest is computed on the shortfall in advance tax payments with reference to the tax liability determined in accordance with law. Since the revised return declared substantial income under various heads, including house property, capital gains, and other sources, the tax liability after statutory credits formed the basis for computing advance-tax instalments. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Insilco Ltd., the CIT(A) held that interest is mandatory and interference is warranted only where the computation is shown to be incorrect. As the assessee failed to identify any specific arithmetical error in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....September 2017; therefore, there was no shortfall in the second instalment either. For the third instalment, 75% of the tax payable amounted to Rs.39,601,123, while the assessee had paid Rs.39,000,000 by 15 December 2017. The shortfall of Rs.601,123 attracted interest at 1% per month for three months, amounting to Rs.18,033. For the fourth instalment, the assessee was required to pay 100% of the tax payable, i.e., Rs.52,801,497, but had paid advance tax of Rs.49,000,000 by 15 March 2018. The shortfall of Rs.3,801,497 attracted interest at 1% for one month, amounting to Rs.38,014. Thus, the total interest payable under section 234C was Rs.56,047. 8. The assessee computed and paid this interest along with the balance self-assessment tax. H....