<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (11) TMI 105 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387856</link>
    <description>Rule 8D can be invoked only after the Assessing Officer, having regard to the accounts, objectively records dissatisfaction with the assessee&#039;s claim or suo motu disallowance under section 14A(2). A bare conclusion that the assessee&#039;s method is inconsistent with Rule 8D is insufficient unless the assessment order first shows account-based dissatisfaction with the disallowance offered. On the facts, the recorded reasons did not meet that statutory threshold, and the Tribunal&#039;s view was a possible view. The challenge based on reliance on an earlier year&#039;s order did not change that result, so the disallowance under Rule 8D was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 13:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592782" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 105 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387856</link>
      <description>Rule 8D can be invoked only after the Assessing Officer, having regard to the accounts, objectively records dissatisfaction with the assessee&#039;s claim or suo motu disallowance under section 14A(2). A bare conclusion that the assessee&#039;s method is inconsistent with Rule 8D is insufficient unless the assessment order first shows account-based dissatisfaction with the disallowance offered. On the facts, the recorded reasons did not meet that statutory threshold, and the Tribunal&#039;s view was a possible view. The challenge based on reliance on an earlier year&#039;s order did not change that result, so the disallowance under Rule 8D was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>