Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
ITAT quashed the PCIT's revisionary order under s.263 as beyond jurisdiction. The Tribunal held that revision cannot be predicated on an assessment under s.153A r/w s.143(3) which had been previously quashed for invalid s.153D approval, because doing so would unlawfully extend statutory limitation; a non-est order cannot be said to be erroneous or prejudicial. The AO's considered findings on excess stock (included in books) and on bad debts u/s 36(1)(vii) were not shown to be erroneous; PCIT failed to identify specific legal or factual errors or apply minds on merits. Applying sublato fundamentum cadit opus, the s.263 order was accordingly set aside.
ITAT quashed the PCIT's revisionary order under s.263 as beyond jurisdiction. The Tribunal held that revision cannot be predicated on an assessment under s.153A r/w s.143(3) which had been previously quashed for invalid s.153D approval, because doing so would unlawfully extend statutory limitation; a non-est order cannot be said to be erroneous or prejudicial. The AO's considered findings on excess stock (included in books) and on bad debts u/s 36(1)(vii) were not shown to be erroneous; PCIT failed to identify specific legal or factual errors or apply minds on merits. Applying sublato fundamentum cadit opus, the s.263 order was accordingly set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
