https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306625 The Court dismissed the case challenging the ITAT order for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appellant argued against the requirement for the Assessing Officer to prove the use of interest-bearing funds for investments, citing Rule 8D(2)(ii). Both appellate authorities found that borrowed funds were not utilized for investments based on the surplus funds available and bank restrictions. The Court, considering these findings and a previous decision, concluded that no substantial legal question arose, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. en-us Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2023 08:51:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306625 The Court dismissed the case challenging the ITAT order for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appellant argued against the requirement for the Assessing Officer to prove the use of interest-bearing funds for investments, citing Rule 8D(2)(ii). Both appellate authorities found that borrowed funds were not utilized for investments based on the surplus funds available and bank restrictions. The Court, considering these findings and a previous decision, concluded that no substantial legal question arose, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306625