https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268496 Where an assessee had own funds far exceeding the investments and eligible lending, interest expense for section 10(23G) and dividend-related section 10(34) income could not be reduced on a notional allocation of interest or managerial cost; only earmarked borrowings actually used could be matched to the exempt income. Interest and penal interest attributable to the period up to 31 March 1999 remained outside tax where that period was statutorily exempt, even if received later. Written down value could not be recomputed by assuming depreciation for a period when no depreciation had actually been allowed, so the depreciation claim was upheld. en-us Wed, 23 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 May 2019 15:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268496 Where an assessee had own funds far exceeding the investments and eligible lending, interest expense for section 10(23G) and dividend-related section 10(34) income could not be reduced on a notional allocation of interest or managerial cost; only earmarked borrowings actually used could be matched to the exempt income. Interest and penal interest attributable to the period up to 31 March 1999 remained outside tax where that period was statutorily exempt, even if received later. Written down value could not be recomputed by assuming depreciation for a period when no depreciation had actually been allowed, so the depreciation claim was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268496