Income Tax : This examines why deductions under section 80GGC are being questioned in assessments. The key takeaway is that compliance with sta...
Income Tax : The issue concerned whether deductions under section 80GGC could be denied solely on investigation inputs alleging accommodation e...
Income Tax : India's Income Tax Department initiates nationwide verification against bogus deduction and exemption claims, warning taxpayers of...
Income Tax : Understand tax benefits under Sections 80GGB & 80GGC for political donations, eligibility rules, compliance needs, and recent lega...
Income Tax : Received an IT notice on political donations? Understand why, what to do, and avoid penalties. Expert advice to respond effective...
Income Tax : The issue was whether penalty applies when a bogus donation claim is withdrawn after detection. The Tribunal held that post-detect...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that failure of the Assessing Officer to verify genuineness of a ₹30 lakh donation under Section 80GGC rendere...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld 200% penalty under Section 270A for misreporting income through ineligible deductions. Admitted incorrect clai...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld disallowance of political donation deductions where the assessee failed to prove genuineness and the transacti...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld deletion of disallowance where the tax authority failed to produce direct evidence linking the taxpayer to any...
The issue was whether penalty applies when a bogus donation claim is withdrawn after detection. The Tribunal held that post-detection withdrawal is not voluntary, and penalty for misreporting was rightly imposed.
The Tribunal held that failure of the Assessing Officer to verify genuineness of a ₹30 lakh donation under Section 80GGC rendered the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, justifying revision under Section 263.
The Tribunal upheld 200% penalty under Section 270A for misreporting income through ineligible deductions. Admitted incorrect claims were treated as conscious misrepresentation, not a bonafide error.
The Tribunal upheld disallowance of political donation deductions where the assessee failed to prove genuineness and the transactions were linked to suspected accommodation entries. The ruling reinforces the burden on taxpayers to substantiate claims under section 80GGC with credible evidence.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of disallowance where the tax authority failed to produce direct evidence linking the taxpayer to any refund of alleged bogus political donations.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that repayment of a shareholder’s own deposit, even if used for political donation, is not deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) as no company funds were advanced.
The issue was whether revision is valid when political donations were not fully verified. The Tribunal held that failure to examine genuineness of donees justifies action under Section 263.
The Tribunal ruled that withdrawing a deduction in response to a Section 148 notice does not erase underreporting. Penalty for misrepresentation under Section 270A was upheld.
The issue was whether alleged commission on bogus donations could be taxed as unexplained expenditure. The Tribunal held that once the donation amount itself is offered to tax, the source stands explained and Section 69C cannot be invoked.
This examines why deductions under section 80GGC are being questioned in assessments. The key takeaway is that compliance with statutory conditions and procedural safeguards protects genuine claims.
