https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303526 The court upheld the ITAT's decision regarding disallowance under Section 14A, emphasizing the need for scrutiny of accounts before disallowance and the limited application of Rule 8D. It found no reason to interfere with the ITAT's order. Regarding the nature of product development charges claimed as revenue expenditure, the court agreed with the lower authorities that the expenditure was linked to the assessee's export business, had seasonal nature, and had been accepted in the past. It concluded that no substantial question of law arose and dismissed the appeals. en-us Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jul 2022 21:28:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303526 The court upheld the ITAT's decision regarding disallowance under Section 14A, emphasizing the need for scrutiny of accounts before disallowance and the limited application of Rule 8D. It found no reason to interfere with the ITAT's order. Regarding the nature of product development charges claimed as revenue expenditure, the court agreed with the lower authorities that the expenditure was linked to the assessee's export business, had seasonal nature, and had been accepted in the past. It concluded that no substantial question of law arose and dismissed the appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303526