Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Samvardhana Motherson International Ltd Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.(C) 480/2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 25/10/2017
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

The chronology of events leading up to the passing of the orders under Section 143(3) of the Act, clearly shows that the AO was `satisfied with the claim of the assessee’ while passing the original orders. Rule 8D is triggered only in a case where the AO is not satisfied with the deduction made by the Assessee. The reasons to believe assume and are predicated on the belief that the AO should not have accepted the Petitioner’s deduction as explained and justified, albeit should have applied Rule 8D. Thus, the view and opinion formed by the AO, while passing the original assessment orders is doubted as erroneous. This is obviously a case of change of opinion.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031