<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (5) TMI 1698 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771426</link>
    <description>Interest paid on delayed remittance of employees&#039; provident fund contribution is not deductible under section 37(1) because employees&#039; share is treated as income under section 2(24)(x) and must be deposited within the prescribed due date under section 36(1)(va). Applying the distinction between employer&#039;s and employees&#039; contributions recognised in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., the article states that if the principal amount is statutorily non-deductible beyond the due date, interest arising from that delay takes the same character and cannot be claimed under the residuary expenditure provision. The disallowance was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 May 2025 17:29:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1698 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771426</link>
      <description>Interest paid on delayed remittance of employees&#039; provident fund contribution is not deductible under section 37(1) because employees&#039; share is treated as income under section 2(24)(x) and must be deposited within the prescribed due date under section 36(1)(va). Applying the distinction between employer&#039;s and employees&#039; contributions recognised in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., the article states that if the principal amount is statutorily non-deductible beyond the due date, interest arising from that delay takes the same character and cannot be claimed under the residuary expenditure provision. The disallowance was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>