Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT held that the final assessment order under s.143(3) was invalid as the Assessing Officer failed to issue a mandatory draft assessment order under s.144C(1) for an eligible assessee (foreign company). This procedural violation constituted a non-curable defect, as it denied the assessee's statutory right to raise grievances before finalization of the assessment. The Revenue did not dispute that the assessee qualified as an "eligible assessee" under s.144C(15)(ii), which required the issuance of a draft order. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the final assessment order, determining that such procedural non-compliance could not be remedied retrospectively.
The ITAT held that the final assessment order under s.143(3) was invalid as the Assessing Officer failed to issue a mandatory draft assessment order under s.144C(1) for an eligible assessee (foreign company). This procedural violation constituted a non-curable defect, as it denied the assessee's statutory right to raise grievances before finalization of the assessment. The Revenue did not dispute that the assessee qualified as an "eligible assessee" under s.144C(15)(ii), which required the issuance of a draft order. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the final assessment order, determining that such procedural non-compliance could not be remedied retrospectively.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
