This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Invocation of rule 8D impermissible without recording non-satisfaction in terms of section 14A(2)
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- HDFC Bank Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2020-21
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Mumbai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
HDFC Bank Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that in absence of recording of non-satisfaction in terms of section 14A(2) of the Income Tax Act, invocation of Rule 8D is not permissible. Accordingly, disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D cannot be sustained.
Facts- The assessee claimed an exempt income of Rs. 612,36,54,955/-while it had made disallowance under Section 14A of the Act as per its Accountant’s report amounting to Rs. 70,18,504/-. The assessee contended that when the securities were held as stock-in-trade, no disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D is warranted. However, AO...
Author Info
