Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
ITAT upheld deletion of disallowance of interest expenditure because the Assessing Officer failed to show any nexus between borrowed funds and non-business use, while the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds and used the borrowings for business purposes. It also sustained deletion of the section 68 addition on unsecured loans because bank statements, confirmations, income-tax records, TDS material and banking-channel transfers established genuineness. The Tribunal further rejected the purchase-difference addition, holding that purchases were recorded at actual cost and the variance from TCS figures arose from rebates, discounts and instances where TCS was not collected. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed in full.
ITAT upheld deletion of disallowance of interest expenditure because the Assessing Officer failed to show any nexus between borrowed funds and non-business use, while the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds and used the borrowings for business purposes. It also sustained deletion of the section 68 addition on unsecured loans because bank statements, confirmations, income-tax records, TDS material and banking-channel transfers established genuineness. The Tribunal further rejected the purchase-difference addition, holding that purchases were recorded at actual cost and the variance from TCS figures arose from rebates, discounts and instances where TCS was not collected. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed in full.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
