https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193212 Interest paid by a firm to a partner's personal loan account, where the partner also represented a Hindu undivided family, was treated as distinct from interest paid to the family as such. On that basis, the applicability of section 40(b) was considered debatable because the loan was personal to the individual and not to the partnership unit represented by the HUF. As two reasonable views were possible, section 154 could not be used to rectify the assessment. The rectification order was set aside and the assessee succeeded. en-us Tue, 22 Jun 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Jul 2017 16:47:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193212 Interest paid by a firm to a partner's personal loan account, where the partner also represented a Hindu undivided family, was treated as distinct from interest paid to the family as such. On that basis, the applicability of section 40(b) was considered debatable because the loan was personal to the individual and not to the partnership unit represented by the HUF. As two reasonable views were possible, section 154 could not be used to rectify the assessment. The rectification order was set aside and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jun 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193212