Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT held that once the AO found the issue of cash deposit into the assessee's bank account, for which reassessment proceedings were initiated u/s 147, was satisfactorily explained, he lost jurisdiction to make any other additions or disallowances. As the reason for reopening the assessment did not subsist, the AO was required to pass a nil order and any further additions made were illegal. Consequently, the other disallowances u/ss 56 and 80P were held unlawful, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that once the AO found the issue of cash deposit into the assessee's bank account, for which reassessment proceedings were initiated u/s 147, was satisfactorily explained, he lost jurisdiction to make any other additions or disallowances. As the reason for reopening the assessment did not subsist, the AO was required to pass a nil order and any further additions made were illegal. Consequently, the other disallowances u/ss 56 and 80P were held unlawful, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
