https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67866 Interest paid by a firm on a partner's personal loan was held not to fall within the disallowance under section 40(b) where the partner represented a Hindu undivided family in the firm. The text notes conflicting High Court views on whether the partner's representative capacity was relevant, but adopts the interpretation favourable to the assessee: the statutory bar applies only when the payment is made to the partner in that representative capacity. As the impugned interest was paid on the partner's personal borrowing and not to the Hindu undivided family through the partner, disallowance was not attracted. en-us Fri, 04 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:09:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67866 Interest paid by a firm on a partner's personal loan was held not to fall within the disallowance under section 40(b) where the partner represented a Hindu undivided family in the firm. The text notes conflicting High Court views on whether the partner's representative capacity was relevant, but adopts the interpretation favourable to the assessee: the statutory bar applies only when the payment is made to the partner in that representative capacity. As the impugned interest was paid on the partner's personal borrowing and not to the Hindu undivided family through the partner, disallowance was not attracted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67866