https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332292 The Court upheld the addition under Section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D(2)(iii) for disallowance of expenses towards exempted income, emphasizing the need for the assessing officer to follow Rule 8D(2)(iii) for quantifying the disallowance amount. The appellant's argument regarding interest-free funds exceeding investments was not satisfactorily proven, leading to the application of Rule 8D(2)(iii). Additionally, the Court found that the earlier order for a different assessment year was not relevant to the current case, dismissing the appellant's argument and upholding the Tribunal's decision based on the burden of proof not being discharged. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Sep 2016 13:24:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332292 The Court upheld the addition under Section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D(2)(iii) for disallowance of expenses towards exempted income, emphasizing the need for the assessing officer to follow Rule 8D(2)(iii) for quantifying the disallowance amount. The appellant's argument regarding interest-free funds exceeding investments was not satisfactorily proven, leading to the application of Rule 8D(2)(iii). Additionally, the Court found that the earlier order for a different assessment year was not relevant to the current case, dismissing the appellant's argument and upholding the Tribunal's decision based on the burden of proof not being discharged. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332292