https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751274 ITAT DELHI ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) for interest-free loans granted, the Tribunal held that payments made from current account for commercial expediency to recover fees cannot be disallowed, following previous coordinate bench decision. Second, for capital gains computation, the Tribunal determined holding period should be calculated from date of flat allotment by DDA rather than buyer's agreement date, following Bombay HC precedent in Vembu Vaidyanathan case, directing AO to accept long-term capital loss. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751274 ITAT DELHI ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) for interest-free loans granted, the Tribunal held that payments made from current account for commercial expediency to recover fees cannot be disallowed, following previous coordinate bench decision. Second, for capital gains computation, the Tribunal determined holding period should be calculated from date of flat allotment by DDA rather than buyer's agreement date, following Bombay HC precedent in Vembu Vaidyanathan case, directing AO to accept long-term capital loss. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751274