https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766486 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of finance charges under Section 36(1)(iii). The tribunal held that a real estate developer's payment of interest on customer advances for delayed flat delivery was allowable as business expenditure. The assessee demonstrated that customer advances were utilized for business purposes. Even loans to group companies engaged in similar real estate business were considered commercially expedient due to business nexus. The AO erroneously disallowed finance charges without valid reasons, and CIT(A) improperly sustained the addition without proper fact appreciation. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Feb 2025 08:17:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766486 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of finance charges under Section 36(1)(iii). The tribunal held that a real estate developer's payment of interest on customer advances for delayed flat delivery was allowable as business expenditure. The assessee demonstrated that customer advances were utilized for business purposes. Even loans to group companies engaged in similar real estate business were considered commercially expedient due to business nexus. The AO erroneously disallowed finance charges without valid reasons, and CIT(A) improperly sustained the addition without proper fact appreciation. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766486