https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221673 Interest relief under Section 234B was refused because the petitioner had not actually incurred the full expenditure claimed, so the factual foundation for allowing the deduction was absent. The earlier decision relied on was distinguished as inapplicable since it did not address a case where the expenditure was not in fact incurred during the relevant year. The Court also found no basis to interfere with the authority's view on the scope of the waiver notification. The challenge to the rejection of waiver therefore failed and the writ petition was dismissed. en-us Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221673 Interest relief under Section 234B was refused because the petitioner had not actually incurred the full expenditure claimed, so the factual foundation for allowing the deduction was absent. The earlier decision relied on was distinguished as inapplicable since it did not address a case where the expenditure was not in fact incurred during the relevant year. The Court also found no basis to interfere with the authority's view on the scope of the waiver notification. The challenge to the rejection of waiver therefore failed and the writ petition was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221673