https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354743 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of expenses amounting to &8377;1,08,61,430 under section 14A of the Act, as there was no exempt income earned during the relevant year. Relying on precedents like Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT and CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd., the Tribunal affirmed that disallowance under section 14A is not applicable in the absence of exempt income. Consequently, both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross Objection were dismissed based on the legal findings and precedents cited in the judgment. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Feb 2018 08:34:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354743 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of expenses amounting to &8377;1,08,61,430 under section 14A of the Act, as there was no exempt income earned during the relevant year. Relying on precedents like Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT and CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd., the Tribunal affirmed that disallowance under section 14A is not applicable in the absence of exempt income. Consequently, both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross Objection were dismissed based on the legal findings and precedents cited in the judgment. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354743