<?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>2001 (10) TMI 58 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12887</link>
    <description>HC reversed the Tribunal and answered the questions in favour of the Revenue. It held that interest paid on borrowings is disallowable in proportion to interest-free advances made to partners, relatives and sister concerns where the firm is not the beneficiary of those investments. The Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing the proportionate interest since borrowings to replace diverted cash are not for the firm&#039;s business purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on a distinguishable decision was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2025 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51898" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 58 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12887</link>
      <description>HC reversed the Tribunal and answered the questions in favour of the Revenue. It held that interest paid on borrowings is disallowable in proportion to interest-free advances made to partners, relatives and sister concerns where the firm is not the beneficiary of those investments. The Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing the proportionate interest since borrowings to replace diverted cash are not for the firm&#039;s business purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on a distinguishable decision was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12887</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>