https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262294 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal of the assessee, holding that the disallowance of administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) for A.Y. 2010-11 was not justified. The ITAT found that the disallowance exceeded the actual expenses debited to the P&L account, leading to the conclusion that Rule 8D(2)(iii) could not be applied in this case. As there were no specific expenses directly related to earning dividend income, the ITAT deemed the assessee's suo motu disallowance appropriate and deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Aug 2015 06:36:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262294 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal of the assessee, holding that the disallowance of administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) for A.Y. 2010-11 was not justified. The ITAT found that the disallowance exceeded the actual expenses debited to the P&L account, leading to the conclusion that Rule 8D(2)(iii) could not be applied in this case. As there were no specific expenses directly related to earning dividend income, the ITAT deemed the assessee's suo motu disallowance appropriate and deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262294