9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The manner of recording of satisfaction has not been laid down either under the Act or the Rules. The manner of recording satisfaction by the AO whether it conforms to the provisions of section 14A is a subjective assessment. The basic requirement is that the AO should express in his satisfaction the reasons for disagreeing with assessee qua suo-moto non disallowance/insufficient disallowance of expenditure incurred towards earning income exempt from tax. In the present case, the Assessing Officer before invoking the provisions of Rule 8D has issued show cause to the assessee. The assessee gave detailed reply citing various decisions. The Assessing Officer after considering the reply of assessee negated the same giving reasons and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and dividend income of ₹ 2,708/-. Both the aforesaid incomes are exempt from tax. Similarly, in the period relevant to the assessment year 2014-15 the assessee earned exempt income of ₹ 29,083/- from partnership firm. Admittedly, no suo-moto disallowance was made by the assessee. The ld. AR asserted that the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Anr. reported as 394 ITR 449 has held that recording of satisfaction u/s. 14A(2) and (3) is a pre-condition before invoking the provisions of Rule 8D. 4. Per contra, Shri Rajesh Gawali representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. DR submitted that a perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . After perusal of the assessment orders for the impugned assessment years, I am satisfied that the Assessing Officer has recorded his satisfaction as envisaged u/s. 14A(3) of the Act. I do not find any merit in the submissions and grounds raised by the assessee assailing the invoking of provisions of section 14A of the Act. 7. No other aspect challenging disallowance u/s. 14A was raised by the ld. AR of assessee before the Bench. I find no merit in the ground raised in both the assessment years. Consequently, the impugned orders for the respective assessment years are upheld and the appeals of assessee are dismissed. 8. In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on Thursday, the 28th day of Februar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
