Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Dominant issue: Whether disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) for alleged diversion of funds is justified. Reasoning: Tribunal found admitted interest receipts from partners and that the assessee charged interest on partners' debit balances, which compensates use of funds; there was also acceptance of availability of substantial interest-free funds and no nexus established between borrowed funds and alleged non-business advances. Legal basis: s.36(1)(iii) requires proof of diversion of borrowed funds for non-business purposes. Outcome: Disallowance under s.36(1)(iii) was unsustainable and the assessee's appeal is allowed. - ITAT
Dominant issue: Whether disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) for alleged diversion of funds is justified. Reasoning: Tribunal found admitted interest receipts from partners and that the assessee charged interest on partners' debit balances, which compensates use of funds; there was also acceptance of availability of substantial interest-free funds and no nexus established between borrowed funds and alleged non-business advances. Legal basis: s.36(1)(iii) requires proof of diversion of borrowed funds for non-business purposes. Outcome: Disallowance under s.36(1)(iii) was unsustainable and the assessee's appeal is allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
