<?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>2019 (9) TMI 850 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386082</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance of interest expenses under section 40(a)(ia) as the recipient had included the interest income in their return and paid taxes on it. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was applicable retrospectively and that the interest payment was duly accounted for by the recipient, leading to the conclusion that the assessee was not in default.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Sep 2019 08:45:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=588190" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 850 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386082</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance of interest expenses under section 40(a)(ia) as the recipient had included the interest income in their return and paid taxes on it. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was applicable retrospectively and that the interest payment was duly accounted for by the recipient, leading to the conclusion that the assessee was not in default.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>