<?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>1965 (2) TMI 109 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178236</link>
    <description>Disallowance of interest is upheld where borrowed funds were not originally borrowed for and actually utilised in the money lending business; historical use governs attribution of borrowed capital, and advances made by the firm to partners for personal purposes, interest free and not used in the business, cannot be treated as business loans, so the firm&#039;s interest deduction is disallowed. Correspondingly, individual partners cannot claim the disallowed interest as a deduction because they did not themselves borrow the sums nor show that withdrawals were capital borrowed for carrying on their separate business activities; partners&#039; claims are rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2016 17:00:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414858" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (2) TMI 109 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178236</link>
      <description>Disallowance of interest is upheld where borrowed funds were not originally borrowed for and actually utilised in the money lending business; historical use governs attribution of borrowed capital, and advances made by the firm to partners for personal purposes, interest free and not used in the business, cannot be treated as business loans, so the firm&#039;s interest deduction is disallowed. Correspondingly, individual partners cannot claim the disallowed interest as a deduction because they did not themselves borrow the sums nor show that withdrawals were capital borrowed for carrying on their separate business activities; partners&#039; claims are rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>