Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT set aside the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore and remanded the matter for fresh consideration regarding TDS credit claims. While the Tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that no reasons were provided for disallowing TDS credits (as AO/CPC had specifically identified unmatched TDS from four contractors), it noted that Form 26AS downloaded on June 18, 2020, showed all TDS entries. The ITAT directed the appellate authority to reconsider the matter in light of previous assessment years (2009-10 to 2014-15 and 2016-17) where similar claims were accepted with refunds issued. The appellant was instructed to respond to notices and provide supporting documentation without seeking adjournments. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT set aside the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore and remanded the matter for fresh consideration regarding TDS credit claims. While the Tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that no reasons were provided for disallowing TDS credits (as AO/CPC had specifically identified unmatched TDS from four contractors), it noted that Form 26AS downloaded on June 18, 2020, showed all TDS entries. The ITAT directed the appellate authority to reconsider the matter in light of previous assessment years (2009-10 to 2014-15 and 2016-17) where similar claims were accepted with refunds issued. The appellant was instructed to respond to notices and provide supporting documentation without seeking adjournments. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
