<?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>2009 (11) TMI 552 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202782</link>
    <description>Interest on a later borrowing used to clear an earlier loan was not deductible against house-property income under section 24(1)(vi) because the original borrowing had been taken for business purposes, not for acquiring, constructing, repairing, renewing or reconstructing the property. The provision extends to subsequent borrowing only where it repays a loan originally taken for an eligible house-property purpose. A circular relied on by the assessee was found inapplicable for that reason, and the authorities also noted that the later borrowing was not wholly confined to discharge of the old liability. The deduction was therefore disallowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 552 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202782</link>
      <description>Interest on a later borrowing used to clear an earlier loan was not deductible against house-property income under section 24(1)(vi) because the original borrowing had been taken for business purposes, not for acquiring, constructing, repairing, renewing or reconstructing the property. The provision extends to subsequent borrowing only where it repays a loan originally taken for an eligible house-property purpose. A circular relied on by the assessee was found inapplicable for that reason, and the authorities also noted that the later borrowing was not wholly confined to discharge of the old liability. The deduction was therefore disallowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>