https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339163 The case involved a dispute over the interpretation of section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the disallowance of expenditures related to exempt income. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) as there was no proven nexus between borrowed funds and investments in shares generating exempt income. However, the disallowance of indirect expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) was upheld. The Tribunal found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. en-us Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339163 The case involved a dispute over the interpretation of section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the disallowance of expenditures related to exempt income. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) as there was no proven nexus between borrowed funds and investments in shares generating exempt income. However, the disallowance of indirect expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) was upheld. The Tribunal found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339163