https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470236 Expenditure apportionment relating to exempt income does not exclude subsidiary or controlling-interest investments merely because of their dominant acquisition purpose; however, computation must be confined to investments that actually yielded exempt income in the relevant year. The disallowance was restored for fresh determination on that basis. Unsold flats held by a real-estate developer as stock-in-trade were not subject to notional annual letting value under the favourable interpretation of the taxing provision. Late fees for service-tax returns and customs duty redemption fine and penalty charges were allowable business expenditure, following identical treatment in earlier years. en-us Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jul 2026 11:06:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470236 Expenditure apportionment relating to exempt income does not exclude subsidiary or controlling-interest investments merely because of their dominant acquisition purpose; however, computation must be confined to investments that actually yielded exempt income in the relevant year. The disallowance was restored for fresh determination on that basis. Unsold flats held by a real-estate developer as stock-in-trade were not subject to notional annual letting value under the favourable interpretation of the taxing provision. Late fees for service-tax returns and customs duty redemption fine and penalty charges were allowable business expenditure, following identical treatment in earlier years. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470236