Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty order under Section 271B, holding it void ab initio for being time-barred. The penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, requiring the penalty order to be passed by 30.06.2020 per Section 275(1)(c). However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on 30.07.2021, exceeding the statutory limitation period. The tribunal ruled that the penalty order was passed without jurisdiction and beyond prescribed time limits, violating procedural requirements and statutory conditions for penalty imposition. The order suffered from legal infirmity and could not be sustained, resulting in its complete set-aside.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty order under Section 271B, holding it void ab initio for being time-barred. The penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, requiring the penalty order to be passed by 30.06.2020 per Section 275(1)(c). However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on 30.07.2021, exceeding the statutory limitation period. The tribunal ruled that the penalty order was passed without jurisdiction and beyond prescribed time limits, violating procedural requirements and statutory conditions for penalty imposition. The order suffered from legal infirmity and could not be sustained, resulting in its complete set-aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.