2014 (3) TMI 770

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ok Suri ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, A. M. This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 27.11.2012, partly allowing the assessee's appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2008-09 vide order dated 16.12.2010. 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., have proceeded on the presumption that r. 8D being mandatory shall have a direct application, i.e., without reference to the factual position and in disregard of the provisions of sections 14A(2) and 14A(3) of the Act. Reference in this regard was made by him to the decisions, inter alia, in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom) and Maxopp Investment Ltd. v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....14A(3) of the Act, and he cannot proceed to mechanically apply r.8D. The decisions in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (supra) and Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) are explicitly clear in the matter. The said onus, though, is onerous inasmuch as the expenditure stands incurred in the regular course of business, and the accounts are generally not aligned activity-wise. Even so, the resources ....