https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756416 The HC remanded the case to the assessing officer for proportionate disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A, finding that the ITAT failed to properly consider apportionment when the assessee borrowed funds for only 2.5 months while purchasing tax-free bonds before and after the borrowing period. On Section 80M deduction, the HC ruled in favor of revenue, holding that deduction should be calculated on dividend income forming part of gross total income, not the full dividend received, following SC precedent in Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. The HC ruled for the assessee on Section 201(1A) interest, finding the ITAT's dismissal unjustified when no separate order was passed. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Aug 2024 18:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756416 The HC remanded the case to the assessing officer for proportionate disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A, finding that the ITAT failed to properly consider apportionment when the assessee borrowed funds for only 2.5 months while purchasing tax-free bonds before and after the borrowing period. On Section 80M deduction, the HC ruled in favor of revenue, holding that deduction should be calculated on dividend income forming part of gross total income, not the full dividend received, following SC precedent in Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. The HC ruled for the assessee on Section 201(1A) interest, finding the ITAT's dismissal unjustified when no separate order was passed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756416