On appeal by revenue, the Delhi High Court considered four issues: whether the disallowance calculated under rule 8D should only take into account investments made by the assessee in order to earn exempt income, or whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer was to be deleted in cases where the Assessing Officer had disallowed a portion of an expense because it was unrelated to the assessee’s business but failed to specify which expenses were not incurred for that purpose. Whether computer software that is essential to the operation of hardware can be depreciated at a rate of sixty percent and Is the money spent developing a website considered a revenue expenditure. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed that with respect to question ‘A’, the issue is covered by Cargo Motors (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2023] 291 Taxman 208/453 ITR 554 (Delhi) wherein the coordinate bench has ruled that the disallowance calculated under Rule 8D of 1962 Rules should factor in only investments made by an assessee to earn exempt income. With respect to the second issue, the same was covered by the decision of a coordinate bench in same is also covered by Pr. CIT v. Times Internet Ltd. [2023] 156 taxmann.com 577 (Delhi)(HC)  With respect to question ‘C’ and ‘D’, the same were covered by decisions of the CIT(A) taken in previous assessment years, and the disallowance was deleted. Hence, it was held that rule of consistency should apply and accordingly. Appeal of Revenue is dismissed.   (AY.  2012-13)