https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249645 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessee had disclosed all primary facts and the additions arose from debatable claims or legal interpretation without any finding of false particulars or concealment. On that basis, penalty linked to surrendered certificates, foreign travel expenses, depreciation on leasehold properties, and dividend income was deleted. Disallowance of interest under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) was not upheld because the assessee showed that exempt investments were funded from own funds and no nexus with borrowed funds was established. Demat account expenses were treated as partly relatable to exempt dividend income, while deletion of the disallowance of long-term capital loss on share sale was upheld because the declared consideration was supported by contemporaneous evidence and no understatement was proved. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jul 2014 08:41:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249645 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessee had disclosed all primary facts and the additions arose from debatable claims or legal interpretation without any finding of false particulars or concealment. On that basis, penalty linked to surrendered certificates, foreign travel expenses, depreciation on leasehold properties, and dividend income was deleted. Disallowance of interest under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) was not upheld because the assessee showed that exempt investments were funded from own funds and no nexus with borrowed funds was established. Demat account expenses were treated as partly relatable to exempt dividend income, while deletion of the disallowance of long-term capital loss on share sale was upheld because the declared consideration was supported by contemporaneous evidence and no understatement was proved. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249645