https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221127 The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal by remanding the issue of the advance to M/s Rassini for reconsideration by the AO. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals) decision on disallowing interest on advances to M/s A.Nitin & Co., M/s Associated Capital Market, Fatu S/o Imamuddin, and other parties due to lack of evidence. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, agreeing with the CIT (Appeals) that no disallowance was warranted for interest overcharged to M/s Bliss Holding Pvt. Ltd., M/s Penwell Ltd., and M/s Novika Investment and Trading Co. Ltd. en-us Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Feb 2013 10:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221127 The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal by remanding the issue of the advance to M/s Rassini for reconsideration by the AO. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals) decision on disallowing interest on advances to M/s A.Nitin & Co., M/s Associated Capital Market, Fatu S/o Imamuddin, and other parties due to lack of evidence. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, agreeing with the CIT (Appeals) that no disallowance was warranted for interest overcharged to M/s Bliss Holding Pvt. Ltd., M/s Penwell Ltd., and M/s Novika Investment and Trading Co. Ltd. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221127