https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465545 Disallowance of interest under s. 36(1)(iii) was contested on the ground that the assessee had not proved borrowing from a bank. The Tribunal held that the loan was sanctioned under a rent securitisation arrangement to another company, with the assessee as a security holder and ultimate recipient of funds, and that documentary evidence established payment of interest through the intermediary; the deletion of disallowance was affirmed and this ground failed. Depreciation on a residential flat was denied because rental receipts were assessable only under "income from house property" (ss. 22-27); depreciation was disallowed, but the AO was directed to allow standard deduction under s. 24(a). Deletion of s. 68 addition was set aside for Rule 46A violation; the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh verification. en-us Wed, 29 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 19:04:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465545 Disallowance of interest under s. 36(1)(iii) was contested on the ground that the assessee had not proved borrowing from a bank. The Tribunal held that the loan was sanctioned under a rent securitisation arrangement to another company, with the assessee as a security holder and ultimate recipient of funds, and that documentary evidence established payment of interest through the intermediary; the deletion of disallowance was affirmed and this ground failed. Depreciation on a residential flat was denied because rental receipts were assessable only under "income from house property" (ss. 22-27); depreciation was disallowed, but the AO was directed to allow standard deduction under s. 24(a). Deletion of s. 68 addition was set aside for Rule 46A violation; the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh verification. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465545