https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400194 The appeal was dismissed, with all substantial questions of law answered in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. The tribunal's decisions on the disallowance under Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii), and the eligibility for deductions under Sections 10B and 80IB(10) were upheld. The tribunal found that the Assessing Officer failed to establish the nexus of interest-bearing funds with tax-free investments, leading to the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) being deleted. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the deletion of disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) as the advances to subsidiaries were deemed to be for business purposes. en-us Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400194 The appeal was dismissed, with all substantial questions of law answered in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. The tribunal's decisions on the disallowance under Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii), and the eligibility for deductions under Sections 10B and 80IB(10) were upheld. The tribunal found that the Assessing Officer failed to establish the nexus of interest-bearing funds with tax-free investments, leading to the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) being deleted. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the deletion of disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) as the advances to subsidiaries were deemed to be for business purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400194