https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297893 The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee and revenue appeals, upholding the CIT(A) order for AY 2012-13. The disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) was justified due to funds not utilized for the assessee's business, considering the parent-subsidiary relationship and lack of commercial expediency. Additionally, the disallowance u/s 14A was deleted as there was no exempt income, leading to the rejection of the revenue's appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of commercial expediency, fund utilization, and the presence of exempt income in determining disallowances under sections 36(1)(iii) and 14A. en-us Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Sep 2021 11:02:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297893 The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee and revenue appeals, upholding the CIT(A) order for AY 2012-13. The disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) was justified due to funds not utilized for the assessee's business, considering the parent-subsidiary relationship and lack of commercial expediency. Additionally, the disallowance u/s 14A was deleted as there was no exempt income, leading to the rejection of the revenue's appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of commercial expediency, fund utilization, and the presence of exempt income in determining disallowances under sections 36(1)(iii) and 14A. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297893