interest on tds

This query is : Resolved 

18 November 2009 whether intest on late payment of tds is allowed as expense in income tax

18 November 2009 Interest for late payment of direct taxes is not deductible - Interest levied on assessee for delay in filing return would not be allowable as business expenditure - Bharat Commerce & Indus­tries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733/98 Taxman 151 (SC).

Interest paid under section 215 for failure to pay advance tax up to statutory percentage would not be allowable as business ex­penditure - Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733/98 Taxman 151 (SC).

Interest paid under section 220(2) for late payment of income-tax is not deductible as revenue expenditure - CIT v. Ashoka Mills Ltd. [1996] 88 Taxman 184/218 ITR 526 (Guj.)/CIT v. Raipur Manu­facturing Co. Ltd. [1996] 135 CTR (Guj.) 248.

Interest for delayed filing of return is not deductible - It cannot be said that interest paid for delay in filing the return has any connection with the business of the assessee. If income-tax is not a permissible deduction under section 37, any interest payable for default committed by the assessee in discharging its statutory obligation under the Income-tax Act which is calculated with reference to the tax or income, cannot be allowed as a deduction - Orient General Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1994] 209 ITR 490 (Cal.).
Interest paid on sales tax arrears is deductible - Interest paid by the assessee to the Sales-tax Department on arrears of sales tax is an admissible deduction under section 37(1) - Lachmandas Mathuradas v. CIT [2002] 254 ITR 799/122 Taxman 828(SC)/CIT v. Western India State Motors [1987] 167 ITR 395 (Raj.)/CIT v. Western Indian State Motors [1988] 174 ITR 116 (Raj.).

Interest on purchase tax arrears is deductible - Interest paid to the Government on arrears of purchase tax is deductible - CIT v. Chodavaram Co-operative Sugars Ltd. [1987] 163 ITR 420 (AP)/CIT v. Shri Sarvaraya Sugars Ltd. [1987] 163 ITR 429 (AP)/Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 683 (Delhi).

18 November 2009 dear nishant,

not allowed because this penalty levied by the payer due delay in deposit the tds. therefore not to claim in expenses


18 November 2009 not allowed


You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries


loading


Unanswered Queries



CCI Pro

Follow us
add to google news


Answer Query



Company
22 June 2026
Finance Manager- Chartered Accountant

Triveni Turbine Limited

Bengaluru

CA

View Details
Company
04 June 2026
Semi Qualified CA

Goyal Puneet & Associates

New Delhi

CA Final

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 27 June 2026
Article

SNCO

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
25 June 2026
AUDIT MANAGER

JDAS & ASSOCIATES

New Delhi

CA

View Details
Company
01 June 2026
Audit, Taxation & Compliance Executive

R P S K & Associates

Nashik

CA Inter

View Details
Company
24 June 2026
Chartered Accountant - GST & Direct Tax

APL

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
Featured 24 June 2026
HEAD - AUDIT AND TAXATION

A R JADHAV AND ASSOCIATES

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 08 June 2026
Internal & Taxation Article

O P Bagla & Co LLP

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details