https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194384 The Tribunal held that Rule 8D cannot be applied retrospectively but found the method used by the CIT(A) for apportioning expenditure towards exempted income to be incorrect. The case was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need to verify the correctness of the assessee's expenditure claims, particularly pre-Rule 8D. The appeals of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the Assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Sep 2017 16:21:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194384 The Tribunal held that Rule 8D cannot be applied retrospectively but found the method used by the CIT(A) for apportioning expenditure towards exempted income to be incorrect. The case was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need to verify the correctness of the assessee's expenditure claims, particularly pre-Rule 8D. The appeals of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the Assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194384