https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364659 The Tribunal held that the CIT-A's deletion of the addition under section 14A read with Rule 8D was not justified as it failed to consider the High Court's decision. The matter was remanded to the AO for verifying the source of investment in line with the High Court's ruling. The Tribunal directed the AO to ascertain whether the investments were made from the assessee's own funds or borrowed funds. The Revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the issue was sent back to the AO for further examination. en-us Tue, 31 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Aug 2018 07:51:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364659 The Tribunal held that the CIT-A's deletion of the addition under section 14A read with Rule 8D was not justified as it failed to consider the High Court's decision. The matter was remanded to the AO for verifying the source of investment in line with the High Court's ruling. The Tribunal directed the AO to ascertain whether the investments were made from the assessee's own funds or borrowed funds. The Revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the issue was sent back to the AO for further examination. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364659