<?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>2020 (4) TMI 213 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394306</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, directing the AO to verify the actual amount of loans and advances to related parties and restrict the interest disallowance accordingly. The disallowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii) was upheld due to the lack of evidence of commercial expediency and sufficient interest-free funds. The decision applied mutatis mutandis to both assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 17:24:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (4) TMI 213 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394306</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, directing the AO to verify the actual amount of loans and advances to related parties and restrict the interest disallowance accordingly. The disallowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii) was upheld due to the lack of evidence of commercial expediency and sufficient interest-free funds. The decision applied mutatis mutandis to both assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>