https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253237 Where appellate evidence showed that TDS had actually been deducted and deposited, the corresponding disallowance could not be sustained because the factual basis for alleging non-deduction and non-remittance stood rebutted; the deletion was upheld against the Revenue. On section 14A, the disallowance relating to expenditure attributable to dividend income was also upheld as deleted because the issue was already covered by the assessee's own earlier case on similar facts, and expenditure relatable to exempt income is disallowable only within the statutory framework. Both substantial questions were answered against the Revenue. en-us Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Nov 2014 08:25:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253237 Where appellate evidence showed that TDS had actually been deducted and deposited, the corresponding disallowance could not be sustained because the factual basis for alleging non-deduction and non-remittance stood rebutted; the deletion was upheld against the Revenue. On section 14A, the disallowance relating to expenditure attributable to dividend income was also upheld as deleted because the issue was already covered by the assessee's own earlier case on similar facts, and expenditure relatable to exempt income is disallowable only within the statutory framework. Both substantial questions were answered against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253237