https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462255 Interest disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) and section 36(1)(iii) was held unsustainable because the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds to cover the investments, and binding precedents supported the deletion of the addition. Further administrative disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) was also rejected because the exempt-income mutual fund investments were made and redeemed during the year, leaving no opening or closing balance for the Rule 8D formula to operate on, especially where a suo motu disallowance had already been made. The Revenue's appeal failed in full. en-us Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jun 2025 19:01:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462255 Interest disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) and section 36(1)(iii) was held unsustainable because the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds to cover the investments, and binding precedents supported the deletion of the addition. Further administrative disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) was also rejected because the exempt-income mutual fund investments were made and redeemed during the year, leaving no opening or closing balance for the Rule 8D formula to operate on, especially where a suo motu disallowance had already been made. The Revenue's appeal failed in full. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462255