https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396604 Where an assessee's own funds were sufficient to cover capital work-in-progress, interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) was not justified because the investment was presumed to have come from interest-free funds unless the Revenue proved a direct nexus with borrowed money. A section 69B addition for unexplained investment could not be sustained on the basis of a seized rough paper entry alone, since rounded notings without corroborative evidence did not establish suppressed consideration. The stated result was deletion of both additions and failure of the Revenue's appeal on merits. en-us Tue, 09 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Nov 2024 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396604 Where an assessee's own funds were sufficient to cover capital work-in-progress, interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) was not justified because the investment was presumed to have come from interest-free funds unless the Revenue proved a direct nexus with borrowed money. A section 69B addition for unexplained investment could not be sustained on the basis of a seized rough paper entry alone, since rounded notings without corroborative evidence did not establish suppressed consideration. The stated result was deletion of both additions and failure of the Revenue's appeal on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396604