Case Law Details
DCB Bank Ltd. Vs Asstt. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
we find that the assessing officer has not recorded the satisfaction as to how the claim of the assessee is wrong with reference to the books of account of the assessee. We are therefore convinced with the submissions of the assessee on this score and are in agreement with the arguments of the learned Authorised Representative that for the invocation of provisions of section 14A read with rule 8D is not mandatory unless and until the assessing officer has recorded his satisfaction. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of the Honb’le High Court rendered in Godrej and Boyce (supra), wherein it has been held that for invocation of provisions of section 14A, the assessing officer has to record satisfaction. We, therefore, respectfully following the ratio laid down in the above decision by the jurisdiction High Court, set aside the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and direct the assessing officer to delete the addition.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
These cross-appeals are directed against the order 5-10-2015 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-6 for the assessment year 2011-12.
I.T.A. No. 249/Mum/2016
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly update the date of order. Its 24th November, 2017.