https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279342 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both cases, emphasizing the direct nexus between expenses and exempt income for disallowances under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The disallowance of administrative expenses on investment in shares for A.Y 2010-11 was deleted as the expenses were found to be specific to business activities and not directly linked to earning exempt income. Similarly, the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the I.T. Act for A.Y 2011-12 was set aside based on the findings of the previous appeal, aligning with the decision for A.Y 2010-11. en-us Thu, 18 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Mar 2019 07:43:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279342 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both cases, emphasizing the direct nexus between expenses and exempt income for disallowances under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The disallowance of administrative expenses on investment in shares for A.Y 2010-11 was deleted as the expenses were found to be specific to business activities and not directly linked to earning exempt income. Similarly, the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the I.T. Act for A.Y 2011-12 was set aside based on the findings of the previous appeal, aligning with the decision for A.Y 2010-11. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 18 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279342