<?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>Actual rent and separate amenity charges must be respected; enhanced annual value, interest disallowance, and section 14A additions fail.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100285</link>
    <description>ITAT held that actual contractual rent under registered leave-and-license arrangements, together with separately agreed commercial amenity charges, could not be replaced by an enhanced annual letting value absent cogent material of suppressed rent, sham transactions, or unaccounted consideration; the addition under section 23(1)(a) was deleted. It also held that interest on borrowed capital used to acquire let-out commercial property was deductible under section 24(b) because the borrowings had a direct nexus with acquisition and the Revenue could not deny relief while taxing the property under the head income from house property; the disallowance was deleted. In the absence of exempt income, section 14A and Rule 8D could not be invoked, and the Finance Act 2022 Explanation was treated as prospective.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2026 08:29:40 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 May 2026 08:29:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=904507" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Actual rent and separate amenity charges must be respected; enhanced annual value, interest disallowance, and section 14A additions fail.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100285</link>
      <description>ITAT held that actual contractual rent under registered leave-and-license arrangements, together with separately agreed commercial amenity charges, could not be replaced by an enhanced annual letting value absent cogent material of suppressed rent, sham transactions, or unaccounted consideration; the addition under section 23(1)(a) was deleted. It also held that interest on borrowed capital used to acquire let-out commercial property was deductible under section 24(b) because the borrowings had a direct nexus with acquisition and the Revenue could not deny relief while taxing the property under the head income from house property; the disallowance was deleted. In the absence of exempt income, section 14A and Rule 8D could not be invoked, and the Finance Act 2022 Explanation was treated as prospective.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2026 08:29:40 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100285</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>