TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1181
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erest to New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and in directing the AO not to reduce the said amount and allow it to be capitalized under project expenses." 3. Ld. Sr. DR supported the assessment order and submitted that the ld CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowances of Rs. 8,35,81,377/- on account of Penal Interest to new Okhla Industrial Development Authority and in directing the AO not to reduce the said amount and allow it to be capitalized under project expenses. 4. Drew our attention towards relevant parts of the assessment order the ld Sr DR submitted that the AO rightly made disallowance in of penal interest out of project expenses (work in progress) by holding that the interest being penal in nature is clearly....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT(A) may kindly be upheld. 7. On careful consideration of the above submissions, from assessment order we note that the AO denied capitalization of interest paid to Noida authority by holding and alleging that the same is penal in nature, thus, not allowable under the provisions of the Act. On the other hand from the relevant part of the first appellate order, we note that the ld CIT(A) recorded following findings for grant of relief to the assessee and allowing the assessee to capitalized impugned amount of interest paid, which reads as follows: "7.1 I have carefully considered the assessment order, submissions by the appellant and the case laws relied upon. 7.2 It is observed from the profit & loss account for the year ended 31.03.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purpose of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be made in respect of such expenditure]" 7.6 In this regard, first of all the interest has not been claimed as expenditure with the meaning of section 37 of the Act or any other section as stated (30 to 36). Further, this is treated by the appellant as work in progress and for the year under consideration, shown as work in progress, which is capital in nature. Therefore, it cannot be treated as not allowable. 7.7 Now coming to the contention of the appellant that simple interest, paid on delayed payment is not penal in nature. Further,....