Tribunal without adverting to the language of Rule 8D. Mr. Malhotra has relied upon Section 14A to submit that by sub-section 2 thereof it is the obligation of the Assessing Officer to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to such income which does not form part of the total income under the Income-tax Act, in accordance with such method as may be prescribed. In the instant case Rule 8D is relied upon by Mr. Malhotra. Mr. Malhotra submits that method of determining the amount of expenditure in relation to income not forming part of total income is firstly by having regard to the account of the assessee for the previous year and if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the correctness of claim of expenditure made or the claim made by the assessee that no expenditure has been incurred, then, sub-rule 2 would come into play. In sub-rule 2, if particularly clause (iii) thereof is applicable, then, the amount equal to 1/2% of the value of investment, income from which does not or shall not form part of the income as appearing in the balance-sheet of the assessee, on the first and last of the previous year ought to be the process followed. He, therefore, would submit that the Commissioner and the Tribunal were in complete error in not allowing the revenue to undertake the exercise that is mandated by Rule 8D for the Assessment Year 2008-09.
