<?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>2006 (1) TMI 207 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69335</link>
    <description>The disallowance of interest on non-business purpose investment was the main issue in this case involving appeals by a limited company. The court found that the company had sufficient funds available from which it advanced money, refuting the claim of diverting borrowed funds. The disallowance of interest was deleted for both assessment years. A disagreement between the Senior Vice President and the Judicial Member arose regarding the disallowance of interest, with the Judicial Member opining that the matter should be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for further adjudication. Ultimately, the appeals of the company were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 12:41:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107705" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 207 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69335</link>
      <description>The disallowance of interest on non-business purpose investment was the main issue in this case involving appeals by a limited company. The court found that the company had sufficient funds available from which it advanced money, refuting the claim of diverting borrowed funds. The disallowance of interest was deleted for both assessment years. A disagreement between the Senior Vice President and the Judicial Member arose regarding the disallowance of interest, with the Judicial Member opining that the matter should be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for further adjudication. Ultimately, the appeals of the company were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69335</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>