https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282472 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under Section 14A, noting the absence of borrowed funds for investments and no exempt income earned. Regarding the disallowance under Section 35D, the ITAT upheld the partial allowance of preliminary expenses based on past practices. The ITAT also supported the CIT(A)'s decision to allow advances as business-related under Section 36(1)(iii). The addition of deemed rental income was affirmed due to lack of evidence of business use. Lastly, the ITAT upheld the deduction under Section 80IA, considering the plant and machinery as new and meeting the statutory requirements. en-us Mon, 10 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:21:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282472 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under Section 14A, noting the absence of borrowed funds for investments and no exempt income earned. Regarding the disallowance under Section 35D, the ITAT upheld the partial allowance of preliminary expenses based on past practices. The ITAT also supported the CIT(A)'s decision to allow advances as business-related under Section 36(1)(iii). The addition of deemed rental income was affirmed due to lack of evidence of business use. Lastly, the ITAT upheld the deduction under Section 80IA, considering the plant and machinery as new and meeting the statutory requirements. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282472