<?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>1988 (6) TMI 21 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24710</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the Department, determining that the overdue interest on demand bills and rediscounting interest paid on bills by the banking company constitute chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act. The court considered legal interpretations and banking practices to establish that the amounts in question qualify as interest, including compensation for delayed payment. The transaction between the assessee and financial institutions was deemed a joint venture, leading to the sharing of interest paid by purchasers. Any amount collected for delayed payment was held to be chargeable interest, irrespective of nomenclature.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:18:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (6) TMI 21 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24710</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the Department, determining that the overdue interest on demand bills and rediscounting interest paid on bills by the banking company constitute chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act. The court considered legal interpretations and banking practices to establish that the amounts in question qualify as interest, including compensation for delayed payment. The transaction between the assessee and financial institutions was deemed a joint venture, leading to the sharing of interest paid by purchasers. Any amount collected for delayed payment was held to be chargeable interest, irrespective of nomenclature.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>