<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1987 (6) TMI 112 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68996</link>
    <description>The Tribunal interpreted section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ruling that interest paid to individuals representing joint families in a firm should be disallowed. The Explanation to section 40(b) clarified this point, indicating that such interest should not be disallowed. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following the Andhra Pradesh High Court&#039;s decision on the Explanation, allowing the appeals and overturning the Commissioner&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 14:01:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (6) TMI 112 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68996</link>
      <description>The Tribunal interpreted section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ruling that interest paid to individuals representing joint families in a firm should be disallowed. The Explanation to section 40(b) clarified this point, indicating that such interest should not be disallowed. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following the Andhra Pradesh High Court&#039;s decision on the Explanation, allowing the appeals and overturning the Commissioner&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>