https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763125 ITAT Mumbai ruled on three key issues. For disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D, the tribunal held that proportionate disallowance should be made after reducing taxable interest income, and only investments yielding exempt income should be considered under Rule 8D's third limb. Regarding MAT computation under section 115JB, the tribunal found that section 14A disallowance should not be added to book profit as separate adjustment mechanism exists under explanation (1) clause (f). For disallowance under section 41(1), the tribunal deleted the addition since creditors remained as trade payables in subsequent years and were eventually paid, showing genuine intention to settle obligations. en-us Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763125 ITAT Mumbai ruled on three key issues. For disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D, the tribunal held that proportionate disallowance should be made after reducing taxable interest income, and only investments yielding exempt income should be considered under Rule 8D's third limb. Regarding MAT computation under section 115JB, the tribunal found that section 14A disallowance should not be added to book profit as separate adjustment mechanism exists under explanation (1) clause (f). For disallowance under section 41(1), the tribunal deleted the addition since creditors remained as trade payables in subsequent years and were eventually paid, showing genuine intention to settle obligations. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763125