https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777487 ITAT held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial under s.263 because the AO, despite issuing a s.143(2) scrutiny notice, failed to verify or make any inquiry into the deduction claimed under s.80G. The tribunal concurred with the PCIT's revision, invoking Explanation 2(a) to s.263, and found the AO did not apply his mind. As there was no material to show the donations were quid pro quo, the tribunal concluded the s.263 revision could not be sustained only to deny the deduction and the assessee remained entitled to claim s.80G relief. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Aug 2025 08:31:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777487 ITAT held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial under s.263 because the AO, despite issuing a s.143(2) scrutiny notice, failed to verify or make any inquiry into the deduction claimed under s.80G. The tribunal concurred with the PCIT's revision, invoking Explanation 2(a) to s.263, and found the AO did not apply his mind. As there was no material to show the donations were quid pro quo, the tribunal concluded the s.263 revision could not be sustained only to deny the deduction and the assessee remained entitled to claim s.80G relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777487