https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778689 ITAT (Bangalore) held that Section 14A and Rule 8D are prospective and not invocable for years before AY 2008-09, answered against revenue; characterization of gain on share sale depends on how shares are shown in the assessee's books (investment ? capital gain; stock-in-trade ? business income) and requires AO verification; MAT under Section 115JB(2)(b) is not applicable to banks constituted as "corresponding new bank" under the 1970 Act; proviso to Section 36(1)(vii) was misconstrued by authorities and Section 36(1)(viia) applies only to rural advances; CSR expenditure allowed as business deduction; RBI penalty remanded to AO for factual scrutiny. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:38:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778689 ITAT (Bangalore) held that Section 14A and Rule 8D are prospective and not invocable for years before AY 2008-09, answered against revenue; characterization of gain on share sale depends on how shares are shown in the assessee's books (investment ? capital gain; stock-in-trade ? business income) and requires AO verification; MAT under Section 115JB(2)(b) is not applicable to banks constituted as "corresponding new bank" under the 1970 Act; proviso to Section 36(1)(vii) was misconstrued by authorities and Section 36(1)(viia) applies only to rural advances; CSR expenditure allowed as business deduction; RBI penalty remanded to AO for factual scrutiny. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778689