https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768807 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal against disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The AO had rejected the assessee's calculation for disallowance without recording satisfaction as required under Section 14A(2). The tribunal held that the AO must record dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim before invoking Rule 8D. Following the precedent in PCIT-2 vs. Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. and the assessee's own case, the tribunal set aside the assessment order and deleted the disallowance made under Section 14A. en-us Mon, 07 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Apr 2025 08:36:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768807 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal against disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The AO had rejected the assessee's calculation for disallowance without recording satisfaction as required under Section 14A(2). The tribunal held that the AO must record dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim before invoking Rule 8D. Following the precedent in PCIT-2 vs. Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. and the assessee's own case, the tribunal set aside the assessment order and deleted the disallowance made under Section 14A. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768807