<?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>2018 (12) TMI 1450 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372681</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowed interest amount under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. It was held that the advances to related parties were for business purposes and in line with commercial expediency. The Tribunal emphasized that if funds were advanced for business reasons and commercial expediency was established, no disallowance of interest should occur, based on precedents from higher courts and tribunals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2018 16:01:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=549600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1450 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372681</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowed interest amount under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. It was held that the advances to related parties were for business purposes and in line with commercial expediency. The Tribunal emphasized that if funds were advanced for business reasons and commercial expediency was established, no disallowance of interest should occur, based on precedents from higher courts and tribunals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>