https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260215 The HC upheld the Tribunal's acceptance of the CIT(A)'s revised disallowance, which apportioned only 10% of income as expenses related to earning dividend income under Rule 8D(ii). The court found no substantial question of law, affirming that investment figures could be used with appropriate expense allocation. The decision favored the assessee, consistent with precedent. en-us Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jul 2025 10:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260215 The HC upheld the Tribunal's acceptance of the CIT(A)'s revised disallowance, which apportioned only 10% of income as expenses related to earning dividend income under Rule 8D(ii). The court found no substantial question of law, affirming that investment figures could be used with appropriate expense allocation. The decision favored the assessee, consistent with precedent. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260215