<?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>2017 (9) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347352</link>
    <description>Interest paid on borrowed funds used for acquisition of property was treated as part of the assessee&#039;s cost of acquisition for long-term capital gains purposes under section 48, because the booking, bank finance, and direct payments to the vendor were integrally connected with the acquisition; indexation on the assessee&#039;s share of that interest was therefore allowed. For car running expenses, the assessee failed to produce a log book or comparable supporting material, so a reasonable ad hoc disallowance for possible personal or non-business use was upheld. The appeal thus succeeded on the capital gains issue and failed on the expense claim, resulting in partial relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2017 11:19:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487885" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347352</link>
      <description>Interest paid on borrowed funds used for acquisition of property was treated as part of the assessee&#039;s cost of acquisition for long-term capital gains purposes under section 48, because the booking, bank finance, and direct payments to the vendor were integrally connected with the acquisition; indexation on the assessee&#039;s share of that interest was therefore allowed. For car running expenses, the assessee failed to produce a log book or comparable supporting material, so a reasonable ad hoc disallowance for possible personal or non-business use was upheld. The appeal thus succeeded on the capital gains issue and failed on the expense claim, resulting in partial relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>