https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460337 Binding precedent controlled all three issues concerning banking-company taxation. Expenditure apportioned under section 20(1)(i) for interest on securities was not restricted by sections 40A(3), 40A(5) and 44C when computing admissible deductions under sections 30, 31, 36 and 37, so the assessee succeeded. Broken-period interest on purchase of securities was treated as not forming part of purchase price and was allowable in the year of purchase, again in the assessee's favour. Interest on sticky advances credited only to a memorandum account was held not taxable on the facts considered, leaving the Revenue's appeal to fail entirely. en-us Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:41:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460337 Binding precedent controlled all three issues concerning banking-company taxation. Expenditure apportioned under section 20(1)(i) for interest on securities was not restricted by sections 40A(3), 40A(5) and 44C when computing admissible deductions under sections 30, 31, 36 and 37, so the assessee succeeded. Broken-period interest on purchase of securities was treated as not forming part of purchase price and was allowable in the year of purchase, again in the assessee's favour. Interest on sticky advances credited only to a memorandum account was held not taxable on the facts considered, leaving the Revenue's appeal to fail entirely. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460337