https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285911 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, endorsing the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, and the deletion of addition of legal expenditure treated as capital expenditure. The Tribunal also partially allowed the assessee's cross objection regarding the disallowance of administrative expenses under Section 14A. However, the Tribunal upheld the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF and ESIC under Section 36(1)(va) and the disallowance of payment debited to ELP for obtaining a search report treated as capital expenditure. en-us Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Feb 2020 13:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285911 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, endorsing the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, and the deletion of addition of legal expenditure treated as capital expenditure. The Tribunal also partially allowed the assessee's cross objection regarding the disallowance of administrative expenses under Section 14A. However, the Tribunal upheld the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF and ESIC under Section 36(1)(va) and the disallowance of payment debited to ELP for obtaining a search report treated as capital expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285911