Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT

254 ITR 799Supreme Court of India2002#885 most cited

What is Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT authority for?

Interest paid on delayed payment of statutory dues, such as sales tax, service tax, TDS, and GST, is compensatory in nature rather than penal. Consequently, such interest is an allowable deduction in computing business profits.

119

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT · 254 ITR 799 · Section 37(1) · interest on delayed payment · statutory dues · compensatory interest · penal interest · allowable deduction · business expenditure · sales tax interest · service tax interest · TDS interest · GST interest

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 132Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 1961Section 201(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 215section 226section 2(43)explanation to section 37section 40(a)(ii)section 2(28a)section 14a(1)statutory duessection 211interest under section 201(1a)prohibited by lawsection 21

Judgments citing Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune vs. M/S. Bank of Maharashtra, Pune

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 596/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Bank Of Maharashtra Vs. Dcit, Circle 1501, Lokmangal, Shivajinagar, 1(1), Pune Pune – 411005 Pan : Aaccb0774B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dcit, Circle Vs. Bank Of Maharashtra 1(1), Pune 1501, Lokmangal, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411005 Pan : Aaccb0774B Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37

…1,71,338/- on the ground that the same is „penal‟ in nature. The Revenue strongly supported the impugned disallowance placing reliance on the learned lower authorities‟ action. We find no merit in its arguments in light of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. CIT (2002) 254 ITR 799 (SC), DCIT vs. Rungta Mines Ltd. 2018 (10) TMI 672 – ITAT Kolkata and M/s. M.L. Reality vs. ACIT 2021 (9) TMI 877 – ITAT Mumbai holding such interest payment on delayed remittances of tax items as an allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37 of the Act. The impugned disallowance accordingly stands deleted. 8. Next comes the assessee‟s fourth substant…

Bank of Maharashtra, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1(1), Pune

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 472/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Bank Of Maharashtra Vs. Dcit, Circle 1501, Lokmangal, Shivajinagar, 1(1), Pune Pune – 411005 Pan : Aaccb0774B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dcit, Circle Vs. Bank Of Maharashtra 1(1), Pune 1501, Lokmangal, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411005 Pan : Aaccb0774B Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37

…1,71,338/- on the ground that the same is „penal‟ in nature. The Revenue strongly supported the impugned disallowance placing reliance on the learned lower authorities‟ action. We find no merit in its arguments in light of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. CIT (2002) 254 ITR 799 (SC), DCIT vs. Rungta Mines Ltd. 2018 (10) TMI 672 – ITAT Kolkata and M/s. M.L. Reality vs. ACIT 2021 (9) TMI 877 – ITAT Mumbai holding such interest payment on delayed remittances of tax items as an allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37 of the Act. The impugned disallowance accordingly stands deleted. 8. Next comes the assessee‟s fourth substant…

M/S Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 46/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…s such the interest on delayed payment is not in the nature of penalty in the instant case on hand. The issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : "The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 45/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…s such the interest on delayed payment is not in the nature of penalty in the instant case on hand. The issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : "The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Total Environment Building Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 40/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…s such the interest on delayed payment is not in the nature of penalty in the instant case on hand. The issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : "The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

M/S Bhopal Dugdh Sangh Sahakari My.Dairy Plant, Bhopal vs. DCIT -1 (1), Bhopal

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

ITA 128/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patva, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Amit Soni, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…e case of very same assessee. The relevant paras relied upon by the Ld. AR are reproduced below: “The issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below: "The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's d…

Icici Home Finance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1325/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(viil)Section 37(1)

…, it is eligible for deduction u/s.37 of the Act as it is expended wholly and exclusively for the business purpose and payment of interest on late remittance of TDS is neither an offence nor prohibited by law, as held in the case of Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT (254 ITR 799) (SC). Therefore, we direct AO to allow the claim of the assessee, hence the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 15. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. 16. Coming to the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA.No. 1358/Mum/2013 (A.Y: 2009-10), revenue has raised following grounds in its appeal: - “1. (i) “On the fac…

Times Internet Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

…llowance relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Chennai High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. 239 ITR 435 (Mad.) (1998). 10. The Hon’ble Apex Court observations in this regard in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 are as follows: “The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench’s decision in Saraya Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 387…

A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 67/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

…has rightly allowed the interest on service tax and interest on VAT at Rs.12,43,982/- & Rs.365/- by respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [2002] 254 ITR 799 (SC) and in the case of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [1980] 123 ITR 429 (SC) holding that such interest paid on service tax and VAT are compensatory in nature and not in the nature of penalty and, therefore, disallowance of such interest cannot be made u/s 37(1) of the Act. As far as the remaining amount…

M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC-3(2), Kolkata

ITA 2492/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

…has rightly allowed the interest on service tax and interest on VAT at Rs.12,43,982/- & Rs.365/- by respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [2002] 254 ITR 799 (SC) and in the case of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [1980] 123 ITR 429 (SC) holding that such interest paid on service tax and VAT are compensatory in nature and not in the nature of penalty and, therefore, disallowance of such interest cannot be made u/s 37(1) of the Act. As far as the remaining amount…

Welkin Telecom Infra Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rjesh Kumar, Am ]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

…1 Welkin Telecom Infra Pvt. Ltd. AY 2014-15 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Rjesh Kumar, AM ] I.T.A. No. 12/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Welkin Telecom Infra (Pvt.) Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN: AAJCS6622G) Circle-11(1), Kolkata Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 25.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 For the Appellant Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate For the Respondent Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT ORDER Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-4, Kolkata date…

M/S Resoive & Fire India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 841/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 201Section 206C(7)Section 215Section 220(2)

…such the interest on delayed payment is not in the nature of penalty in the instant case on hand. The issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : "The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the said view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

M/S. Indecomm Global Services (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2800/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 40

…stating that 'service tax' only forms part of the balance sheet and is not routed through the statement of profit and loss account. 1.2 The learned CIT(A) has erroneously held that the appellant has placed reliance on verdict of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. CIT 254 ITR 799 (SC), and not considered the other judicial precedents submitted that have held that the interest on delayed payment of service tax is 'compensatory' in nature and not 'penal' and hence the allowable as a business expenditure under the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 2. Non-deduction of withholding tax on year-end accrual in the case of legal a…

M/S. Indecomm Global Services (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2799/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 40

…stating that 'service tax' only forms part of the balance sheet and is not routed through the statement of profit and loss account. 1.2 The learned CIT(A) has erroneously held that the appellant has placed reliance on verdict of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs. CIT 254 ITR 799 (SC), and not considered the other judicial precedents submitted that have held that the interest on delayed payment of service tax is 'compensatory' in nature and not 'penal' and hence the allowable as a business expenditure under the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 2. Non-deduction of withholding tax on year-end accrual in the case of legal a…

Shri. Manuprasad Trivedi, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 5 (1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7270/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Jain DixitFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…. As regards the interest on delay in payment of TDS, the issues was not before the Apex Court in the case mentioned above. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd reported in (1998) 230 ITR 733(SC) & Lachmandas Mathura reported in 254 ITR 799(SC) wherein it was held interest paid on late deposit of sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. V. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733/98 Taxman 151 (SC) has held that Interest paid under section 215 for failure to pay advance tax up to statutory percentage would not be…

Shalimar Fabricators Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal for AY 2017-18 is allowed and the appeal for AY 2018-19 is partly allowed

ITA 428/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Aby T. Varkey & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 23ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43BSection 44A

…issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT 7 I.T.A. Nos.: 386 & 428/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shalimar Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : “The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the scud view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

Shalimar Fabricators Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal for AY 2017-18 is allowed and the appeal for AY 2018-19 is partly allowed

ITA 386/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Aby T. Varkey & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 23ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43BSection 44A

…issue of delay in the payment of service tax is directly covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT 7 I.T.A. Nos.: 386 & 428/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shalimar Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. reported in 254 ITR 799 in favour of assessee. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below : “The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the interest on arrears of sales tax is penal in nature and has rejected the contention of the assessee that it is compensatory in nature. In taking the scud view the High Court has placed reliance on its Full Bench's…

Tiriyogi Narayan Singh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-28, Kolkata

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

ITA 245/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Tiriyogi Narayan Singh Acit, Circle-28, Kolkata C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Vs. Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. Pan: Apmps8395D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit. Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2022 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Act Dated 26.07.2021 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Ay 2014-15. 2. The Issue Raised In Ground No. 1 Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) Upholding The Order Of Ao Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 24,286/- On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employee’S Contribution To Provident Fund & Esi.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 43B

…nd therefore not allowable. 11. After hearing parties and perused the material on record, we find that issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the two decisions namely Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs CIT 123 ITR 429 (SC) and Lachmandas Mathuradas vs CIT 254 ITR 799 (SC). In the first decision the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that interest paid u/s 3(3) of the Cess Act cannot be described as a penalty paid for an infringement of law whereas in the second decision, the interest paid the assessee to the Sales-tax Department on arrears of sales tax is held to be an admissible deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. W…

A.C.I.T., Circle-49(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Viswakarma Residency, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 255/KOL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/ Assessment Years:2016-17 बनाम / Acit, Cir-49(1), Kolkata M/S. Viswakarma Residency Uttarpan Complex, Ds-Iv, V/S. 2Nd Fl., Manicktala Civick Centre, Block-2 & 3, 2Nd Fl., Kolkata-700 054. Pan: Aaifv3279Q अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. Hearing Through Video Conferencing अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manish Kanojia, Cit, Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri S.M Surana, Advocate, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-08-2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26-10-2021

Section 131Section 133(6)

…- made by the ld. AO on account of delayed payment of interest on service tax and TDS holding the same as penal in nature. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799(SC) and further on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 2127/Kol/2014 dated 30-08-2017, wherein it has been held that the delayed payment of interest on service tax was compensatory in nature and the same was an allowable deduction. The Ld. DR could not point out any inf…

ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. Tcg Urban Infrastructure Holdings Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 2584/KOL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…s. 2584 to 2588 & A.Ys. 2004­05 to 2007­08 & 2009­10 ACIT, C­2 (1), Kol Vs. TCG Urban Infras. Holding P.Ltd A.Y 2007­08 TCG Urban Infras. Holding P.Ltd Vs. ACIT, C­2 (1), Kol Page 18 taken by Hon'ble Supreme Court In the case of Lachmandas Mathuradas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799(SC). Similarly, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income­tax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.,272 ITR 224(All) have held that interest on delayed payment of provident fund is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. Hon'ble Delhi High Court In the case of Commissioner of Income­tax v. Delhi Automobiles,…