2015 (6) TMI 140 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Applicability of Rule 8D(ii) - Held that:- The figures under the head "Investment" could be taken and some charges apportioned for the purpose of computing the expenses. The Commissioner found from such figures, that only 10% of the income earned could be apportioned towards expenses for earning the dividend income. CIT(A) therefore, made a revised disallowance been accepted by Tribunal. No substantial question of law - See Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assesse.