https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751843 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal on two grounds. First, regarding short-term capital gains computation under Section 48, the tribunal permitted deduction of management fees paid to BNP Paribhas, following precedents from KRA Holdings and Nadir A Modi cases, applying the principle that when two views are possible, the assessee-favorable view should be preferred. Second, concerning disallowance under Section 14A for exempt income, the tribunal ruled that the AO incorrectly invoked Rule 8D without recording proper dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim, as mandated under Section 14A(2), making the disallowance unsustainable. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Apr 2024 11:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751843 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal on two grounds. First, regarding short-term capital gains computation under Section 48, the tribunal permitted deduction of management fees paid to BNP Paribhas, following precedents from KRA Holdings and Nadir A Modi cases, applying the principle that when two views are possible, the assessee-favorable view should be preferred. Second, concerning disallowance under Section 14A for exempt income, the tribunal ruled that the AO incorrectly invoked Rule 8D without recording proper dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim, as mandated under Section 14A(2), making the disallowance unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751843