https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59212 Section 80M deduction had to be computed on dividend income as assessed under the Act, not on the gross dividend received. In determining that income, only expenditure allowable under section 57(iii) could be deducted, and where common corporate expenditure related to both dividend and interest income with no reliable segregation, a fair apportionment by the assessing authority was permissible. The claim that the whole outlay should be assigned only to interest income was rejected because the expenses had nexus with both income streams. The argument that the assessee carried on an investment and financing business so that section 37(1) applied was also rejected, as no business activity was established and the receipts were taxable under income from other sources. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Dec 2010 11:28:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59212 Section 80M deduction had to be computed on dividend income as assessed under the Act, not on the gross dividend received. In determining that income, only expenditure allowable under section 57(iii) could be deducted, and where common corporate expenditure related to both dividend and interest income with no reliable segregation, a fair apportionment by the assessing authority was permissible. The claim that the whole outlay should be assigned only to interest income was rejected because the expenses had nexus with both income streams. The argument that the assessee carried on an investment and financing business so that section 37(1) applied was also rejected, as no business activity was established and the receipts were taxable under income from other sources. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59212