ACIT CIRCLE-16(2), NEW DELHI vs. MAXIMAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the decision of the Ld. CIT(A), ruling that the interest paid on delayed EDC is a revenue expenditure and not penal or capital in nature. The Tribunal relied on its own previous decisions for the assessee and precedents like CIT vs. Enchante Jewellery Ltd., affirming that such interest is an allowable business expense, especially when related to projects already completed and sold.
What were the facts?
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) disallowed an expenditure of Rs. 5,47,36,000/- claimed by Maximal Infrastructure Private Limited as interest paid on delayed External Development Charges (EDC) to HUDA, treating it as penal and capital in nature. The Ld. CIT(A) subsequently allowed this expenditure, classifying it as revenue. The Revenue appealed this decision.
What were the issues?
Whether interest paid on delayed External Development Charges (EDC) is an allowable revenue expenditure or a penal/capital expense; and its treatment regarding work-in-progress.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Enchante Jewellery Ltd.8 citing40 Taxmann.com 216 · 2013 · HC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, DELHI
Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM:
The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-37, New Delhi, dated 27.01.2020 arising out of the Assessment Order dated 22.12.2017 passed by the ITO, Ward - 16(3) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) Assessment Year 2015-16. The matter relates to P a g e | 2 Maximal Infrastructure Private Limited expenditure of interest on EDC to the tune of Rs.5,47,36,000/- which was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A).
Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 37(1)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Smit Navnitlal Soni, Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs ITO Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad, GujaratITA 1434/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026