Case Law Details
Samvardhana Motherson International Ltd. Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)
The chronology of events leading up to the passing of the orders under section 143(3) of the Act, clearly shows that the assessing officer was ‘satisfied with the claim of the assessee’ while passing the original orders. Rule 8D is triggered only in a case where the assessing officer is not satisfied with the deduction made by the assessee. The reasons to believe assume and are predicated on the belief that the assessing officer should not have accepted the Petitioner’s deduction as explained and justified, albeit should have applied rule 8D.
Rule 8D is triggered only in a case where AO is not satisfied with chronology of events leading up to the passing of orders under section 143(3), clearly showed that AO was ‘satisfied with the claim of the assessee’ as regards disallowance under section 14A while passing the original orders and reopening of assessment was based on mere change of opinion, hence invocation of rule 8D was beyond acceptance.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT / ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-
We with the consent of the parties have heard the arguments and the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
