https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408035 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal on three grounds. First, disallowance under section 40(a)(a) for non-deduction of TDS on interest payments was deleted as the assessee deposited amounts with court but had not paid actual recipients directly, making TDS obligations unclear. Second, depreciation rate on plant and machinery was increased from 10% to 15% as claimed by assessee, rejecting AO's treatment as building. Third, penalty/fine expenditure disallowance was deleted as payments were compensation for procedural delays to government departments, not law violations, qualifying as allowable business expenditure under section 37(1). en-us Thu, 27 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Jul 2025 14:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408035 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal on three grounds. First, disallowance under section 40(a)(a) for non-deduction of TDS on interest payments was deleted as the assessee deposited amounts with court but had not paid actual recipients directly, making TDS obligations unclear. Second, depreciation rate on plant and machinery was increased from 10% to 15% as claimed by assessee, rejecting AO's treatment as building. Third, penalty/fine expenditure disallowance was deleted as payments were compensation for procedural delays to government departments, not law violations, qualifying as allowable business expenditure under section 37(1). Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408035