Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC quashed the reopening notice issued under section 148, holding that the disputed amount was a credit balance related to F&O trading, payments, margins, and interest, not an unsecured loan. The Court affirmed that trade advances are excluded from the scope of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e), consistent with established precedents. It emphasized that loans and advances given in the normal course of business benefiting both parties do not attract section 2(22)(e). Further, the Court reiterated the necessity of a reasoned link to the formation of belief for reopening assessments. Consequently, the reassessment was invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The HC quashed the reopening notice issued under section 148, holding that the disputed amount was a credit balance related to F&O trading, payments, margins, and interest, not an unsecured loan. The Court affirmed that trade advances are excluded from the scope of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e), consistent with established precedents. It emphasized that loans and advances given in the normal course of business benefiting both parties do not attract section 2(22)(e). Further, the Court reiterated the necessity of a reasoned link to the formation of belief for reopening assessments. Consequently, the reassessment was invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.