TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 987
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ab initio. 2. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in issuing notice under section 148A(b) without furnishing complete relied-upon documents and without disposing of the objections of the appellant by way of a reasoned and speaking order. 3. The order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act by the Ld. Assessing Officer is bad in law, as it has travelled beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice by treating the alleged escapement of income at Rs. 10,00,000/- instead of Rs. 5,00,000/- as originally alleged. 4. The order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act by the Ld. Assessing Officer is bad in law, as sanction under section 151 of the Act was obtained only in respect of alleged escapement of Rs. 5,00,000/-, where....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss violation of principles of Audi Alteram Partem. -This further resulted into inability of the appellant to seek cross-examination of the third parties whose statements have been heavily relied upon while rejecting the claim of deduction under section 80GGC of the Act. -That the order under section 147 has been issued by mechanically adopting the findings of the Investigation Wing without independent enquiry or analysis, thereby acting on "borrowed satisfaction," which is impermissible in law. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of 5,00,000/- for the donation made to the Apna Desh Party and more particularly: -That the disallowance of donation of Rs. 5,00,000/- made to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und that the assessee has donated Rs. 10,00,000/- through banking channel. These 10 parties are mentioned on page 4 of the assessment order. The assessee filed response to the show cause notices and after taking into account the said responses, the Assessing Officer held that the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s. 80GGC was bogus and the paper work was merely colourable device. Thus, the Assessing Officer disallowed the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- claimed u/s. 80GGC of the Act and made addition. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The ld. A.R. submitted that in respect of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee filed return of i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n respect of Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (Secular) wherein registered un-recognized political parties and not that of any specific parties as the Assessing Officer has mentioned in the assessment order. But from the perusal of the records related to the information details of search conducted at Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (Secular), the assessee's name was categorically mentioned related to the donation given. Thus, ground no. 1 that the reopening is valid/void ab initio does not sustain as the 144AD order categorically mentions the deduction claimed u/s. 80GGC to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- and though in para 4 only the RSP amounting to Rs. 5,00,000/- was mentioned in para 8.2 of the said order, the total donation of Rs. 10,00,000/- claimed....