<?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 (10) TMI 1022 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400048</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the disallowance of interest paid on unsecured loans. It concluded that the interest rate of 18% was justified as the market rate, and the restriction imposed by the Assessing Officer was unwarranted. The Tribunal criticized the lower authorities for not properly considering the factual contentions of the assessee and upheld the principle of consistency in accepting the interest rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2020 13:25:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 1022 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400048</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the disallowance of interest paid on unsecured loans. It concluded that the interest rate of 18% was justified as the market rate, and the restriction imposed by the Assessing Officer was unwarranted. The Tribunal criticized the lower authorities for not properly considering the factual contentions of the assessee and upheld the principle of consistency in accepting the interest rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>