https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752537 Where an assessee has sufficient surplus interest-free funds to cover investments in exempt income-yielding assets, interest expenditure cannot be attributed to such investments under Rule 8D(2)(ii), and the disallowance is not sustainable. Payment for domain name registration, on facts showing only access to a registration process for checking uniqueness and registration, without transfer of copyright or any use or right to use software, process, equipment or technology, does not constitute royalty or fees for technical services, so disallowance under section 40(a)(i) is not warranted. The Revenue's appeal failed and the deletions made by the first appellate authority were upheld. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 May 2024 16:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752537 Where an assessee has sufficient surplus interest-free funds to cover investments in exempt income-yielding assets, interest expenditure cannot be attributed to such investments under Rule 8D(2)(ii), and the disallowance is not sustainable. Payment for domain name registration, on facts showing only access to a registration process for checking uniqueness and registration, without transfer of copyright or any use or right to use software, process, equipment or technology, does not constitute royalty or fees for technical services, so disallowance under section 40(a)(i) is not warranted. The Revenue's appeal failed and the deletions made by the first appellate authority were upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752537