Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The ITAT held that the AO, after examining the assessee's explanation, was prima facie satisfied with the correctness of the suo motu disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A read with Rule 8D. The revisionary authority cannot substitute the AO's satisfaction with its own without making an inquiry. The assessee consistently followed a particular methodology for suo motu disallowance u/s 14A, which was accepted in past assessment years. If the AO, being satisfied with the assessee's explanation, accepted the suo motu disallowance consistent with the past methodology, the assessment order cannot be considered erroneous. Thus, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 was invalid. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT held that the AO, after examining the assessee's explanation, was prima facie satisfied with the correctness of the suo motu disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A read with Rule 8D. The revisionary authority cannot substitute the AO's satisfaction with its own without making an inquiry. The assessee consistently followed a particular methodology for suo motu disallowance u/s 14A, which was accepted in past assessment years. If the AO, being satisfied with the assessee's explanation, accepted the suo motu disallowance consistent with the past methodology, the assessment order cannot be considered erroneous. Thus, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 was invalid. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
