Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the order passed u/s 263. The issue pertained to the liability u/s 201/201(1A) for non-deduction of tax at source on payments made to HUDA for external/infrastructure development charges. The ITAT observed that the issue was pending before the CIT(A), and the PCIT should not have initiated proceedings u/s 263 when the matter was sub-judice. The ITAT held that the AO's order was not erroneous when passed, and there was no prejudice to the Revenue's interest. The ITAT concluded that the PCIT's invoking of Section 263 was unjustified, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the order passed u/s 263. The issue pertained to the liability u/s 201/201(1A) for non-deduction of tax at source on payments made to HUDA for external/infrastructure development charges. The ITAT observed that the issue was pending before the CIT(A), and the PCIT should not have initiated proceedings u/s 263 when the matter was sub-judice. The ITAT held that the AO's order was not erroneous when passed, and there was no prejudice to the Revenue's interest. The ITAT concluded that the PCIT's invoking of Section 263 was unjustified, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
