https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360457 ITAT Delhi held that a section 43B disallowance could not be sustained where the assessee's own earlier years had already ined the issue on indistinguishable facts and the statutory dues were paid during the relevant year, so the deletion was upheld. On section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) and (iii), the record did not establish any nexus between borrowed interest-bearing funds and exempt investments, and the appellate finding that the disallowance was not warranted on the facts was affirmed, with recomputation limited only to the excluded investment category. The revenue's appeal failed and the assessee obtained relief on the surviving issues. en-us Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 May 2018 05:56:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360457 ITAT Delhi held that a section 43B disallowance could not be sustained where the assessee's own earlier years had already ined the issue on indistinguishable facts and the statutory dues were paid during the relevant year, so the deletion was upheld. On section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) and (iii), the record did not establish any nexus between borrowed interest-bearing funds and exempt investments, and the appellate finding that the disallowance was not warranted on the facts was affirmed, with recomputation limited only to the excluded investment category. The revenue's appeal failed and the assessee obtained relief on the surviving issues. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360457