How many judgments cite Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT?

70 judgments on BharatTax cite Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT (123 ITR 429), spanning 1993 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 37, Section 115BAA, Section 69C, Section 153C, Section 69A.

Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT

123 ITR 429Supreme Court of India1980#1603 most cited

What is Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT authority for?

Payments that are compensatory in nature, such as interest paid for the delayed payment of statutory dues like cess, are an allowable business deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act. Such payments are not considered a penalty for an infringement of law.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 1993 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT · section 37(1) · compensatory interest deduction · delayed payment interest · business expenditure allowability · penalty versus compensatory · income tax deduction · 123 ITR 429 · interest on statutory dues · deductibility of fines and penalties

Also reported as

16 CTR 198

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 37 Section 115BAA Section 69C Section 153C Section 69A Section 250 Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(2)(xv)explanation to section 37 prohibited by law section 201(1a)block of assets section 37(1)profits and gains of business or profession put to use revenue expenditure section 30 section 37 capital expenditure

Judgments citing Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bonai Industrial Company Limited, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1655/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 73

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA Before Shri Aby.T Varkey, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2013-14 DCIT, Central Circle- V/s. M/s Bonai Industrial Co. 1(3), Aayakar Bhawan, Ltd., 8A, Express Tower, Poorva,3rd Floor,110, 42A Shakespeare Saran, Shantipally, Kolkata-107 Kolkata-12 [PAN No.AAACB 9156 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. CIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date…

Tamilnadu Industrial Development Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1160/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. SailendraMamidi. Pr. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण ,’ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन . एस . आर . गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम# BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1159 & 1160/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 &2010-11 M/s. Tamilnadu Industrial Development Assistant Commissioner of Income Corporation Limited, Vs. Tax, No. 19-A, RukminiLakshmipathy Road, Corporate Circle -3(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai - 600 034. [PAN: AAACT 3409P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ%क&ओ…

Tamilnadu Industrial Development Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1159/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. SailendraMamidi. Pr. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

M/S. the Faridabad Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

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

ITA 2991/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Sh.C.M.Garg, Judical Member The Faridabad Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Vs Acit, Sco-27, Sector-16, Faridabad. Circle-1, Pan-Aaaff2989B Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh.Anshu Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2017

Section 43B

…T(A took the view that the said interest was penal in nature and, therefore, confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. In our view, the issue is duly covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Company vs CIT 123 ITR 429 in which Hon’ble Supreme Court held while dealing with the same issues in respect of the sugarcane cess that such interest to be deductible on the ground that it was in reality part and parcel with the liability to pay cess and was not penalty accretion to the cess. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhamp…

Media Experts P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5825/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Milin BakhaiFor Respondent: Shri B. Satyanarayana Raju, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43B

…d it appears that the same has been accepted by the assessee also. Therefore, as such there is no dispute on merits whether the amount of Rs. 7,38,11,883/- warranted deduction u/s 43B or not – Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills co. vs. CIT (1980) 16 CTR (SC) 198: (1980) 123 ITR 429 (SC) relied on”. 5. From the above it is evident that the claim of interest in relation with the sales tax liability becomes a part of the tax and the same is allowable u/s 43B of the Act when the same is actually paid. While coming to the said conclusion, Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case…

M.J. Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T.3(2), Mumbai

ITA 4874/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaita Nos.4874 & 4937/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S M.J. Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-3(2), C/O- H.N. Motiwalla & Co. Mumbai बनाम/ 508 Sharda Chambers, Vs. 33, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue ) Pan. No.Aadcm7712M

Section 158A(1)Section 269USection 37Section 43B

…ent of custom duty therefore, the same forms part and parcel of liability of customs duty. The learned counsel for the assessee advanced identical arguments by placing reliance upon the decision from Hon’ble Apex court in Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. vs. CIT (123 ITR 429) (SC). It was also pleaded that the decision from Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Hindustan Motors Ltd. vs. CIT (1996)(218 ITR 450) (Cal) is not applicable being on different facts by explaining that liability crystallized in A Y 2007-08 and demand was raised on 18.09.2006. Our attention was invited to a certificate from Canara Bank dated 20.…

M/S. Thought Works Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1326/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri Pravin PrasadFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C(2)

…with the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that interest paid on delayed deposit of TDS amount into Government account cannot be held to be penal in nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT Vs. Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills reported in 123 ITR 429(SC) has held as under: “Now the interest payable on an arrear or cess under s.3(3) is in reality part and parcel of the liability to pay Cess. It is an accretion to the cess. The arrear of cess ‘carries’ interest; if the cess is not paid within the prescribed period a larger sum will become payable as cess. The enlargement of the cess liability…

Shankar Trading Co P. Ltd

The appeal stands disposed of

ITA - 144 / 2000HC Delhi20 Jan 2012

For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra, Ms Kavita Jha, Mr Somnath ShuklaFor Respondent: Mr Deepak Chopra

Section 260ASection 28Section 43B

…eemed to be tax under this act; (iii) be in addition to the penalty, if any, imposed under this Act.” 6. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee also drew our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills v. CIT: 123 ITR 429 SC in support of his contention that the interest payable on a tax would also be part of the tax. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that as there was no demand for interest, the interest of Rs. 10,04,408/- was not a sum payable and that the Tribunal’s decision in this regard ought not to be interfered with. 7. Ha…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi -IV vs. Govind Nagar Sugar Ltd

Appeals are allowed and orders passed by the Tribunal are set aside and the

ITA/1208/2008HC Delhi19 Nov 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

Section 4Section 43B

…Page 12 of 15 the PF contribution by the employer is delayed. It is, therefore, clearly compensatory and cannot be treated as penal in nature. 10. In the case of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi [(1980) 123 ITR 429 (SC)] where the question of interest payable on arrears of cess which was to be paid on entry of sugarcane into the premises of a factory for use, consumption or sale therein would be in the nature of penalty. The Court answered the question in the negative holding that it would be compensatory in nature. In the case of Prakash Cotton Mil…

Prakash Cotton Mills Private Limited vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)

In the result, we allow that appeal partly and remit the

C.A. No.-001279-001279 - 1977Supreme Court06 Apr 1993

For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) BOMBAY

Section 256Section 37Section 37(1)Section 37(2)

…ibunal. First Question: Section 37(1) of the I.T. Act corresponds to Section 10(2)(XV) of Predecessor Indian Income-Tax Act of 1922 (the I.T. Act of 1922), is undisputed. In Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. Commissioner of Income- tax, Delhi, (1980) 123 ITR 429, this Court had to decide the question whether the interest paid by the appellant-assessee therein under Section 3(3) of the U.P. Sugarcane Cess Act, 1956 for delayed payment of cess payable thereunder was an allowable expenditure under Section 10(2)(XV) of the I.T. Act of 1922. For deciding that question, this Court examined the…