<?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>1995 (8) TMI 24 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18636</link>
    <description>Interest on borrowed funds was examined under section 5(e) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, against the alternative limit under section 5(k). The legal position was not disputed, but the factual foundation for applying section 5(e) was incomplete because the record did not clearly show that the borrowed money was used on land from which agricultural income was not derived. The description of expenditure as mostly for maintenance was held too vague to support a final factual finding. The matter was therefore remanded to the assessing authority for fresh determination, with liberty to the assessee to produce supporting proof, and the existing orders were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:35:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (8) TMI 24 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18636</link>
      <description>Interest on borrowed funds was examined under section 5(e) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, against the alternative limit under section 5(k). The legal position was not disputed, but the factual foundation for applying section 5(e) was incomplete because the record did not clearly show that the borrowed money was used on land from which agricultural income was not derived. The description of expenditure as mostly for maintenance was held too vague to support a final factual finding. The matter was therefore remanded to the assessing authority for fresh determination, with liberty to the assessee to produce supporting proof, and the existing orders were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18636</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>