Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Interest on borrowed capital was held deductible as revenue expenditure because the Tribunal's binding factual finding showed the investments in subsidiary or joint venture concerns were made for business expansion and commercial expediency in the assessee's fertilizer business. The Revenue's contrary view was rejected, and the later remand on actual use of borrowed funds was treated as academic in light of that finding. On rectification, the Court held that a prior liberty to move the Tribunal did not oblige it to allow rectification; no mistake apparent from the record was shown, so dismissal of the miscellaneous petition was proper. The appeal was dismissed.
Interest on borrowed capital was held deductible as revenue expenditure because the Tribunal's binding factual finding showed the investments in subsidiary or joint venture concerns were made for business expansion and commercial expediency in the assessee's fertilizer business. The Revenue's contrary view was rejected, and the later remand on actual use of borrowed funds was treated as academic in light of that finding. On rectification, the Court held that a prior liberty to move the Tribunal did not oblige it to allow rectification; no mistake apparent from the record was shown, so dismissal of the miscellaneous petition was proper. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
