https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469010 Under section 14A read with Rule 8D, the direct expenditure linked to exempt income was sustained, but the interest disallowance was deleted because sufficient interest-free funds were available and the investment was presumed to be from own funds. The administrative expenditure component was not accepted in full and was remanded for fresh computation in accordance with law. On section 74, the Tribunal held that long-term capital loss on sale of listed shares covered by the section 10(38) exemption regime could not be carried forward as claimed, and the carry-forward claim was rejected. en-us Fri, 29 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 May 2026 12:44:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469010 Under section 14A read with Rule 8D, the direct expenditure linked to exempt income was sustained, but the interest disallowance was deleted because sufficient interest-free funds were available and the investment was presumed to be from own funds. The administrative expenditure component was not accepted in full and was remanded for fresh computation in accordance with law. On section 74, the Tribunal held that long-term capital loss on sale of listed shares covered by the section 10(38) exemption regime could not be carried forward as claimed, and the carry-forward claim was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469010