<?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>1994 (7) TMI 18 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19276</link>
    <description>Interest paid to directors on balances in running accounts was treated as interest on deposits for disallowance under the Income-tax Act because the court construed &quot;deposit&quot; broadly to include amounts placed in current or running accounts with the company. The absence of a fixed term did not remove such balances from the statutory expression, and the exclusion in the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 was read as confirming that director-related amounts otherwise fall within the ordinary meaning of deposit unless specifically exempted. The interest was therefore disallowable, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:40:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58275" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 18 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19276</link>
      <description>Interest paid to directors on balances in running accounts was treated as interest on deposits for disallowance under the Income-tax Act because the court construed &quot;deposit&quot; broadly to include amounts placed in current or running accounts with the company. The absence of a fixed term did not remove such balances from the statutory expression, and the exclusion in the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 was read as confirming that director-related amounts otherwise fall within the ordinary meaning of deposit unless specifically exempted. The interest was therefore disallowable, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19276</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>