https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234960 Bombay HC held against the Revenue on two points: first, deduction for interest paid was allowable because the assessee's investments in mutual funds were made from own (interest-free) funds, borrowed funds having been used to repay a higher-rate loan, and there is no legal requirement to maintain separate accounts to prove source of funds. Second, a prior-period expenditure claimed under the mercantile system was allowable where the liability crystallized only on receipt of the bill and had been consistently treated in earlier assessments; the Revenue must adopt a consistent approach. en-us Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2025 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234960 Bombay HC held against the Revenue on two points: first, deduction for interest paid was allowable because the assessee's investments in mutual funds were made from own (interest-free) funds, borrowed funds having been used to repay a higher-rate loan, and there is no legal requirement to maintain separate accounts to prove source of funds. Second, a prior-period expenditure claimed under the mercantile system was allowable where the liability crystallized only on receipt of the bill and had been consistently treated in earlier assessments; the Revenue must adopt a consistent approach. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234960