https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432323 HC upheld concurrent factual findings of the lower authorities, rejecting the AO's disallowance claims. The appellate authorities correctly found investments were made from own funds, not borrowed funds, so no interest expenditure was attributable to exempt dividend income beyond the suo moto apportionment applied by the assessee. CIT(A) properly deleted additions under s.32 after considering documents the AO had ignored; ITAT recorded that the relevant evidence was filed during assessment. Revenue's challenge was dismissed. en-us Thu, 22 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Sep 2025 13:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432323 HC upheld concurrent factual findings of the lower authorities, rejecting the AO's disallowance claims. The appellate authorities correctly found investments were made from own funds, not borrowed funds, so no interest expenditure was attributable to exempt dividend income beyond the suo moto apportionment applied by the assessee. CIT(A) properly deleted additions under s.32 after considering documents the AO had ignored; ITAT recorded that the relevant evidence was filed during assessment. Revenue's challenge was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432323