https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790238 Interest paid for delayed remittance of PF, ESI and service tax was treated as compensatory rather than penal, so the deduction under section 37(1) was allowed. Disallowance under section 40A(3) failed because the record did not establish cash payments to a single person in a day beyond the statutory limit, and the supporting vouchers, registers and attendance records showed the expenses were properly documented. The addition under section 68 was also unsustainable because the amount was accepted as an advance received in the ordinary course of business against future supply, supported by subsequent sale invoices, and was not shown to be unexplained cash credit. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790238 Interest paid for delayed remittance of PF, ESI and service tax was treated as compensatory rather than penal, so the deduction under section 37(1) was allowed. Disallowance under section 40A(3) failed because the record did not establish cash payments to a single person in a day beyond the statutory limit, and the supporting vouchers, registers and attendance records showed the expenses were properly documented. The addition under section 68 was also unsustainable because the amount was accepted as an advance received in the ordinary course of business against future supply, supported by subsequent sale invoices, and was not shown to be unexplained cash credit. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790238