https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466364 The dispute concerns disallowance under section 14A and the Rule 8D methodology for allocating expenditure to exempt income. The tribunal found the assessee had declared a suomotu disallowance for minimal quoted shareholdings and concluded the appellate authority lacked cogent reasons to reject that selfassessed adjustment; consequence: the suomotu disallowance was treated as acceptable. The tribunal also noted a closely similar earlier tribunal decision dismissing the revenue's appeal on the same point, reinforcing that, on these facts, no larger disallowance should be imposed. en-us Tue, 10 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Feb 2026 22:11:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466364 The dispute concerns disallowance under section 14A and the Rule 8D methodology for allocating expenditure to exempt income. The tribunal found the assessee had declared a suomotu disallowance for minimal quoted shareholdings and concluded the appellate authority lacked cogent reasons to reject that selfassessed adjustment; consequence: the suomotu disallowance was treated as acceptable. The tribunal also noted a closely similar earlier tribunal decision dismissing the revenue's appeal on the same point, reinforcing that, on these facts, no larger disallowance should be imposed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466364