<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (1) TMI 311 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270519</link>
    <description>Interest on borrowings used to repay the developer&#039;s loan and to meet finishing and improvement expenditure for a property was treated as deductible under section 24(b). The Tribunal noted that the loan from UCO Bank was connected to the repayment and completion-related costs, and that the supplementary arrangement could not be disregarded merely because later lease deeds did not mention it. It also applied the principle of consistency, holding that a factual position accepted in an earlier scrutiny assessment should not be disturbed in later years without contrary material. On that basis, the disallowance was held unsustainable and the interest claim was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:07:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412373" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 311 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270519</link>
      <description>Interest on borrowings used to repay the developer&#039;s loan and to meet finishing and improvement expenditure for a property was treated as deductible under section 24(b). The Tribunal noted that the loan from UCO Bank was connected to the repayment and completion-related costs, and that the supplementary arrangement could not be disregarded merely because later lease deeds did not mention it. It also applied the principle of consistency, holding that a factual position accepted in an earlier scrutiny assessment should not be disturbed in later years without contrary material. On that basis, the disallowance was held unsustainable and the interest claim was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>