https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192588 The Assessing Officer's appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority's decisions. The addition for capitalization of expenditure related to a contract was found to be correctly disallowed in the hands of the subsidiary company, not the assessee. Additionally, the disallowance under section 14A of the Income-tax Act was restricted to the amount voluntarily disallowed by the assessee, as no exempt income was earned during the year. The Tribunal affirmed that disallowance under section 14A can only be made if expenditure is claimed against exempt income. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jun 2017 06:16:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192588 The Assessing Officer's appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority's decisions. The addition for capitalization of expenditure related to a contract was found to be correctly disallowed in the hands of the subsidiary company, not the assessee. Additionally, the disallowance under section 14A of the Income-tax Act was restricted to the amount voluntarily disallowed by the assessee, as no exempt income was earned during the year. The Tribunal affirmed that disallowance under section 14A can only be made if expenditure is claimed against exempt income. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192588