https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234954 Interest disallowance relating to interest-free advances was restored because the financer and moneylender failed to substantiate the availability of surplus interest-free funds or the asserted business connection of the advances. Facts within the assessee's special knowledge required supporting evidence, and unsupported oral explanations could not justify restricting the disallowance. Exemption for investment in construction of a residential house was available under section 54F despite the plot being owned by the assessee's wife. As a beneficial provision, section 54F required liberal construction in line with its object. Revenue therefore succeeded on the interest-disallowance issue but not on the exemption claim. en-us Mon, 29 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jul 2013 07:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234954 Interest disallowance relating to interest-free advances was restored because the financer and moneylender failed to substantiate the availability of surplus interest-free funds or the asserted business connection of the advances. Facts within the assessee's special knowledge required supporting evidence, and unsupported oral explanations could not justify restricting the disallowance. Exemption for investment in construction of a residential house was available under section 54F despite the plot being owned by the assessee's wife. As a beneficial provision, section 54F required liberal construction in line with its object. Revenue therefore succeeded on the interest-disallowance issue but not on the exemption claim. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234954