Held that the assessee had sufficient surplus funds and had raised capital during the year by issuance of shares. Thus, merely because the assessee had also raised loans or paid interest against loans that did not justify the disallowance. The investment in subsidiary and related entities has to be made for commercial purpose to earn future profits. It was not the case of the Department that investments were made in any entity not having any nexus with the principal object of the assessee-company. The disallowance of interest is not justified. Failure by authorities to consider suo motu disallowance made by assessee matter remanded. (AY.2013-14)