<?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>Separate taxable entity principle upheld for a partnership firm; pre-existence interest expenditure remained disallowed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98602</link>
    <description>A partnership firm is a separate taxable entity under the Income-tax Act only from the date it comes into existence, so it cannot claim interest expenditure attributable to an earlier period when the business was still a proprietorship concern. The Tribunal held that the firm, having commenced on 15.06.2014, was entitled to deduct expenses only for its own period of existence and not for 01.04.2014 to 14.06.2014. The proportionate disallowance of interest made by the Assessing Officer and upheld in first appeal was therefore sustained. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned on sufficient cause.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895823" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Separate taxable entity principle upheld for a partnership firm; pre-existence interest expenditure remained disallowed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98602</link>
      <description>A partnership firm is a separate taxable entity under the Income-tax Act only from the date it comes into existence, so it cannot claim interest expenditure attributable to an earlier period when the business was still a proprietorship concern. The Tribunal held that the firm, having commenced on 15.06.2014, was entitled to deduct expenses only for its own period of existence and not for 01.04.2014 to 14.06.2014. The proportionate disallowance of interest made by the Assessing Officer and upheld in first appeal was therefore sustained. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned on sufficient cause.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>