<?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 (9) TMI 260 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331999</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, permitting the deduction of Rs. 17,04,950 claimed towards interest on capital and salary to partners. The disallowance under section 40(b) was deemed unjustified as the unaccounted income was solely from the assessee&#039;s construction business activities. The Tribunal referenced relevant case law supporting the inclusion of such income for partner remuneration, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2016 15:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 260 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331999</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, permitting the deduction of Rs. 17,04,950 claimed towards interest on capital and salary to partners. The disallowance under section 40(b) was deemed unjustified as the unaccounted income was solely from the assessee&#039;s construction business activities. The Tribunal referenced relevant case law supporting the inclusion of such income for partner remuneration, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>