https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263931 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in all three issues, dismissing the revenue's appeals. The disallowance of broken period interest was overturned based on judicial precedents and RBI guidelines supporting its allowance. The disallowance of amortization of premium paid in excess of face value of securities was rejected, considering the securities as stock-in-trade and in line with RBI guidelines. The disallowance of deduction claimed under section 36(1)(viia) for bad and doubtful debts was upheld due to the absence of a provision in the books of account, as required by legal interpretations. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263931 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in all three issues, dismissing the revenue's appeals. The disallowance of broken period interest was overturned based on judicial precedents and RBI guidelines supporting its allowance. The disallowance of amortization of premium paid in excess of face value of securities was rejected, considering the securities as stock-in-trade and in line with RBI guidelines. The disallowance of deduction claimed under section 36(1)(viia) for bad and doubtful debts was upheld due to the absence of a provision in the books of account, as required by legal interpretations. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263931